it was built as a Tor-like network that supports P2P. So I wouldn't put Tor in the P2P category... they actually try to block torrents.
I2P has peer-to-peer features like bittorrent built in. Another interesting thing is the webserver you get, and the fact that even a home ISP subscriber gets a stable/unchanging address no different from any of the big nodes... I2P makes the IP address-changing problem go away.
K and G in the application name is very small thing and those who feel it is so terrible.
It communicates a lack of care and taste to the user who shouldn't feel compelled to track which programs go with their DE anyway. Knowing what OS you have should be enough!
*I* use CentOS with a desktop and can tell you it is not comparable with Ubuntu's packaging of Gnome. Like I already suggested, YOU use CentOS as your primary desktop/laptop for 3 months and see how it is.
It just so happens that VLC mangles audio on both platforms, but the Linux version is the one that matters and is totally unrelated to the Mac version.:^D
Well I have to coach novices to Ubuntu when I make a decision to "go around MS" for clients. I gotta tell you: KDE 4.x is a nightmare to coach people on. Its very, very intimidating as its constantly throwing (useless) visual cues at the user such as control panels that always slide out of windows when you mouse over them. KDE defaults are too confusing and I quickly found out that people won't put up with it.
Windows-like chrome does not make a UI as sensible to use as Windows.
As for myself, I now use OS X and try to point people in that direction when a Windows alternative is called-for.
It's unfortunate that people view the whole KDE vs. Gnome thing as some kid of holy war
That almost couldn't be helped, since Gnome was explicitly created to try to kill off KDE (if you think that choice of words is harsh, you should read what some of the Gnome founders said back in the day). Gnome was created with a negative goal, and I think that underlying fact prevented them from excelling.
I now use Gnome only because distros tend to write their system settings UIs for Gnome first and then forget to write some of them for the KDE flavor.
The main problem KDE has is one of "sensible defaults", or lack thereof. A lot of buttons and functions that should be optional and looked-for by advanced users is pushed right in your face by default. Trying to coach new users on KDE (4.x especially) has been exasperating. The default KDE configuration should be nearly as simple as Gnome; Neither DE is trying to find a good balance in that regard.
Another problem is that people coming to a Linux distro have to be aware of things like "DE" apart from what their OS is. I usually find people understand when I first explain, but forget basic details and start to feel confused on the subject a couple of months later. Its one of the things that makes them reject "Linux" in the end.
Um, no. Ubuntu is not simply Redhat server with "apt get install gnome-desktop".
If it were that simple then all desktop distros would be the same except for their wallpaper.
Gnome desktop gives you icons and such, but is not enough to deal with many common media formats nor the many kinds of devices that a user is likely to plug in or have integrated in their system. And on such a Redhat + Gnome system, some common-sense vertical integrations that make the system more usable will be absent.
you could find a distro that lets you stay on a 5/7 year old version and still get security upgrades.
I could, but what about my clients? You think I want to be manually upgrading their Firefox and OpenOffice (etc...) for the next 3-5 years? Because the distros will not be upgrading those apps when doing security updates. Even worse, most of my clients know how to do simple app upgrades themselves in the PC style (download, click to install) but the Linux distro methodology doesn't allow for this. So they get frustrated and order me to put Windows back on the machine.
I suggest you try using Redhat as a desktop for a few months yourself before telling others to use it.
Rolling updates would make a bad environment worse from the perspective of 3rd party application developers. Assuming you'll get all your apps from the OS vendor hasn't worked for Linux distros, and rolling upgrades would make the non-platform seem even less inviting.
Foremost that stuff like Firefox, OpenOffice and other userend apps wont get upgraded to newer versions until the next rollover.
I agree. However, that's what you get in a system where the OS updates are indistinguishable from Application updates.
Its also why so many people 10yrs ago (like myself) were deleting 3/4 of their Debian-based systems when trying to remove or change a single problematic dependency for an app.
OS and App package management should be handled separately.
You get the idea. Interesting how a certain media group displays a shocking ignorance of their own industry and the industries immediately adjacent to it.
...apart from using HTTPS for everything, which is the least likely to happen in the short term.
This guy who wrote TFA should be encouraging router manufacturers to distribute easy-setup home VPNs. You could have the router monitor the home email address and notify the client when it changes.
Once you've got a home VPN, all of this free wifi security stuff is moot.
Most Americans are now infected with a passion for punishment. Particularly if you don't fit into all of the establishment's categories for being a successful "All-American" type.
Its all over the help forums of distros like Ubuntu and others.
As for your confused bit about X protocol vs various implementations, TFA *is* about Ubuntu you know... which is a specific OS that's trying to keep people's screens from going dark.
Where other capabilities like screen/window sharing are concerned, I do take issue with the X protocol... which doesn't allow this very common use case (though may be rare with old people named 'Alastair'). And I do not consider VNC (a 1980s bitmap-only protocol) a competitive means to accomplish sharing.
What do you mean by this? Do you mean that X is fragile because it's hard to parse the ASCII config file or correctly handle the configuration options?
It should be obvious what I mean. There is no cardinal way to lay out the ASCII text of xorg.conf. If a sysadmin or a 3rd party utility needs to make changes, the distro-supplied settings tool will often not know how to deal with it and try to replace the file with default settings. Further, updates that require tweaks to xorg.conf will tend to leave a custom-edited config in a mangled state.
If everything goes through X's (non-existent) API for changing and saving, then these conflicts don't arise. Also, if the file is stored as an XML schema, even manual changes should avoid conflicts.
There shouldn't be a million ways to create a correct X config file, and a utility shouldn't have to include a whole copy of X's own parser just to avoid conflicts.
Slashdot Mirror
it was built as a Tor-like network that supports P2P. So I wouldn't put Tor in the P2P category... they actually try to block torrents.
I2P has peer-to-peer features like bittorrent built in. Another interesting thing is the webserver you get, and the fact that even a home ISP subscriber gets a stable/unchanging address no different from any of the big nodes... I2P makes the IP address-changing problem go away.
By that reasoning, VLC should basically be a Windows application and the Linux version relegated to the back burner.
But what you seem to be saying is the Linux version's problems are an aberration just because VLC *should* be mainly a Linux program.
K and G in the application name is very small thing and those who feel it is so terrible.
It communicates a lack of care and taste to the user who shouldn't feel compelled to track which programs go with their DE anyway. Knowing what OS you have should be enough!
*I* use CentOS with a desktop and can tell you it is not comparable with Ubuntu's packaging of Gnome. Like I already suggested, YOU use CentOS as your primary desktop/laptop for 3 months and see how it is.
PS- You won't like it!
LOL! Yeah "probably"
It just so happens that VLC mangles audio on both platforms, but the Linux version is the one that matters and is totally unrelated to the Mac version. :^D
And then Apple copied them with the letter i, and I've never heard anyone describe that as childish.
Um, dude, that's cuz names like "iChat" and "iWork" make some sense.
Think about it. Prepending a 'K' or 'Gn' onto most names does little to help a user identify with them.
Well I have to coach novices to Ubuntu when I make a decision to "go around MS" for clients. I gotta tell you: KDE 4.x is a nightmare to coach people on. Its very, very intimidating as its constantly throwing (useless) visual cues at the user such as control panels that always slide out of windows when you mouse over them. KDE defaults are too confusing and I quickly found out that people won't put up with it.
Windows-like chrome does not make a UI as sensible to use as Windows.
As for myself, I now use OS X and try to point people in that direction when a Windows alternative is called-for.
Wait, this is scary! An app (VLC) that twists my Mac's bluetooth audio into catatonic spasms is being used as an audio back end??
Yikes...
It's unfortunate that people view the whole KDE vs. Gnome thing as some kid of holy war
That almost couldn't be helped, since Gnome was explicitly created to try to kill off KDE (if you think that choice of words is harsh, you should read what some of the Gnome founders said back in the day). Gnome was created with a negative goal, and I think that underlying fact prevented them from excelling.
I now use Gnome only because distros tend to write their system settings UIs for Gnome first and then forget to write some of them for the KDE flavor.
The main problem KDE has is one of "sensible defaults", or lack thereof. A lot of buttons and functions that should be optional and looked-for by advanced users is pushed right in your face by default. Trying to coach new users on KDE (4.x especially) has been exasperating. The default KDE configuration should be nearly as simple as Gnome; Neither DE is trying to find a good balance in that regard.
Another problem is that people coming to a Linux distro have to be aware of things like "DE" apart from what their OS is. I usually find people understand when I first explain, but forget basic details and start to feel confused on the subject a couple of months later. Its one of the things that makes them reject "Linux" in the end.
Um, no. Ubuntu is not simply Redhat server with "apt get install gnome-desktop".
If it were that simple then all desktop distros would be the same except for their wallpaper.
Gnome desktop gives you icons and such, but is not enough to deal with many common media formats nor the many kinds of devices that a user is likely to plug in or have integrated in their system. And on such a Redhat + Gnome system, some common-sense vertical integrations that make the system more usable will be absent.
you could find a distro that lets you stay on a 5/7 year old version and still get security upgrades.
I could, but what about my clients? You think I want to be manually upgrading their Firefox and OpenOffice (etc...) for the next 3-5 years? Because the distros will not be upgrading those apps when doing security updates. Even worse, most of my clients know how to do simple app upgrades themselves in the PC style (download, click to install) but the Linux distro methodology doesn't allow for this. So they get frustrated and order me to put Windows back on the machine.
I suggest you try using Redhat as a desktop for a few months yourself before telling others to use it.
"Desktop" is not a subset of "Server"... I wish geeks would stop assuming such a relationship.
The problem with the current system comes for the less technical users...
You left out application developers who tend to view OSes lacking feature stability as hostile environments.
Have the Linux desktop people suddenly forgot that apps are sorely needed? Have they forgotten the PC mantra that the apps sell the system?
Rolling updates would make a bad environment worse from the perspective of 3rd party application developers. Assuming you'll get all your apps from the OS vendor hasn't worked for Linux distros, and rolling upgrades would make the non-platform seem even less inviting.
I will steer clear of Mint also!
Foremost that stuff like Firefox, OpenOffice and other userend apps wont get upgraded to newer versions until the next rollover.
I agree. However, that's what you get in a system where the OS updates are indistinguishable from Application updates.
Its also why so many people 10yrs ago (like myself) were deleting 3/4 of their Debian-based systems when trying to remove or change a single problematic dependency for an app.
OS and App package management should be handled separately.
RIAA artists slyly encouraging ( underage sex | adultery | drive-by shooting | etc... )
You get the idea. Interesting how a certain media group displays a shocking ignorance of their own industry and the industries immediately adjacent to it.
...the only thing that logging in could have possibly done is let them go on a fishing expedition.
...apart from using HTTPS for everything, which is the least likely to happen in the short term.
This guy who wrote TFA should be encouraging router manufacturers to distribute easy-setup home VPNs. You could have the router monitor the home email address and notify the client when it changes.
Once you've got a home VPN, all of this free wifi security stuff is moot.
curious minds...
Most Americans are now infected with a passion for punishment. Particularly if you don't fit into all of the establishment's categories for being a successful "All-American" type.
Good. Don't justify their fears by acting like a thug.
Don't justify their fears by calling yourself rabid.
Who the hell hand edits X config files any more?
Its all over the help forums of distros like Ubuntu and others.
As for your confused bit about X protocol vs various implementations, TFA *is* about Ubuntu you know... which is a specific OS that's trying to keep people's screens from going dark.
Where other capabilities like screen/window sharing are concerned, I do take issue with the X protocol... which doesn't allow this very common use case (though may be rare with old people named 'Alastair'). And I do not consider VNC (a 1980s bitmap-only protocol) a competitive means to accomplish sharing.
[anecdote is not data]
And I suggest you consider finding a good XML editor.
What do you mean by this? Do you mean that X is fragile because it's hard to parse the ASCII config file or correctly handle the configuration options?
It should be obvious what I mean. There is no cardinal way to lay out the ASCII text of xorg.conf. If a sysadmin or a 3rd party utility needs to make changes, the distro-supplied settings tool will often not know how to deal with it and try to replace the file with default settings. Further, updates that require tweaks to xorg.conf will tend to leave a custom-edited config in a mangled state.
If everything goes through X's (non-existent) API for changing and saving, then these conflicts don't arise. Also, if the file is stored as an XML schema, even manual changes should avoid conflicts.
There shouldn't be a million ways to create a correct X config file, and a utility shouldn't have to include a whole copy of X's own parser just to avoid conflicts.
X is a part of any proper Unix.
Proper Unix doesn't have any graphical display capabilities at all.
Now get off my lawn.
You mean like the Altair 8800? That was a bit of UI heaven.