It doesn't change that much. While Windows may "support" Opteron (we all what Microsorft means by "support" - just look at their 32Bit-excuse of Windows/Alpha), the programs don't.
Also, when Microsoft sais "middle of the year", we shouldn't hold our breath. It can take a little bit longer...
With Linux, on the other hand, you can start right away with a fully optimized distribution and have all programs using Operon's features right from the start.
I wish to God they would, but they won't. If you run a business of anything beyond a dozen people, you cannot just drop your IT Infrastructure and switch to Macs and/or Linux. I have an iBook. I just installed Red Hat 9 on one of my home servers last night. I think they're great for doing what I want. But I am not a whole company. I also didn't invest hundreds of thousands of dollars into my current set up. Telling a business "Can't you just switch" or "If you don't like it, do use it" is completely naive.
I don't know why anybody would want to throw everything out overnight.
But haven't it occured to you that maybe just stop upgrading Windows and using Linux boxes when the hardware needs to be replaced is a viable alternative.
1: There are lots of comments about this on this very thread. But there were just too many things "weird". People denied to vote, recounts prevented on purpose, irregularities on voting machines, etc.
The only democratic thing to do would be to do a partial (where people have been wrongly denied their right to vote) or complete second vote.
2: So you mean to tell me that when a president signs something it is meaningless and the next president can pretend it never happened?
5: OK, I don't have proof, but I think nuclear weapons clearly classify as weapons of mass destruction.
On the one side, you have a political leader who has come to power through undemocratic means[1], who unilaterally breaks treaties[2], who doesn't care about UN-resolutions[3], doesn't care about basic human rights[4] and has weapons of mass destruction[5]. And on the other side you have Saddam Hussein.
Tough to pick a side.
1: Ballot-fraud in Florida,
2: Kyoto-agreement,
3: Invasion of Iraq, keeping prisoners in Cuba without lawsuit
4: This story plus keeping prisoners in Cuba without lawsuit
5: Obvious - about 20000 nuclear heads plus a lot more chemical and biological weapons.
If MS/Sony come along and says "our next gen console not only provides you with the best gaming experience available but acts as a home hub providing email/web access, programme recording/playback as well, all for no extra cost" who is going to complain?
Microsoft-shareholders. Because a money-losing venture that will never make a profit will take business away from Windows-software with something like 80% profit margin.
There is a very good reason why XBox USB ports are made incompatible to normal connectors. The reason is that the XBox must not compete with PCs.
I think Oracle may bite the bullet a lot harder than Microsoft though because they are less diversified.
I think you don't see what Microsoft does. Microsoft does not "diversify", they set up one money-losing adventure after another.
Just look at XBox. Would die within 2 weeks without Microsoft pouring cash into it. Or look at MSN. Would die without the cash infusions and without all the free surfers because they get the default page on Windows. Or look at MS Office - it creates a lot of cash but it also would die without Windows. Their keyboards and mice are also losing money.
Take Windows away from Microsoft and their whole empire is destroyed.
My major concern is that it doesn't support external mail programs like kmail - when you click on a mailto: link, nothing happens in Phoenix.
I saw Phoenix as a very interesting and promising fork until development has essentially stopped. To see the Mozilla folk pick it up again is a relief.
These are supposed to be hard facts? MS-DOS machines were far cheaper than Apple machines, so it isn't a like for like.
Wow, you summarized my point, I'm proud of you.
Eye-candy was irrelevant in their decision in choosing the platform. That was exactly my point.
If aiming at technical people, then I agree eye-candy should be off by default. If aimed at less-technical people then leave it on. You only have to look at what WinXP and MacOS X look like, presumably based on large market research budgets, to see what the general public want.
Nonsense. The reason why they turn all that on by default is because it looks good on demo-machines which is necessary to get sold.
Day-to-day work is very different from trying stuff on a demo machine.
Now tell me in what way the forced "minimized" animations are helping me. I mean there is only one dock, so I shouldn't get confused about where it will be minimized, or will I?
Well, I can't stand the way IE scrolls, if Mozilla has found a better way, fine with me.
However I wouldn't like it as a default. Maybe if it's extremely successful and widely used in 1.4, you could make it the default in 1.5, but for now I wouldn't.
Why do so many people believe that "less technical users [are those] who value eye candy"?
Is there even something, I'm not even asking for proof, just a hint or some study that supports the hypothesis that less technical users want eye-candy?
I have several hard facts that are supporting the theory that less technical users don't give a shit about eye candy:
Less technical users used MS DOS for over half a decade when Apple and others were available as alternative
In the late 90's, Enlightment was sure one of the most - if not the most - eyecandy infested Windowmanager. Yet it was only used by geeks, less technical users didn't care.
The first search-engines like Yahoo put more and more eyecande (and advertisments) on their sites - and Google wiped the floor with them by providing the simplest search engine interface possible with absolutely no eye-candy, just a white page.
I also tried MacOSX. In the first 15 minutes, you are really blown away. It's smooth, everything is animated, everything looks good. After about 20 minutes, you get used to the effects, after an hour they just slow you down and go on your nerves. I could only choose between 2 different types of animation for minimize, so you can't even get rid of some of it.
If eye-candy gets into the way, it should be off by default, IMO and smooth-scrolling is a prime example.
1.) Enter "http://flaky.site.com/somepathyoudontremember" into URL-bar.
2.) Surf elsewhere around because you know that flaky.site.com is flaky and will take a while to load.
3.) If flaky.site.com is currently unavailable, the URL is replaced with "about:blank" and "somepathyoudontremember" is lost forever.
Konq is somewhat better in that, it doesn't mangle URLs of (currently) unavailable servers, so you can hit reload. (But it also does what is described in the parent, unfortunately.)
Well there are source-rpms - it would be very well possible to use srpm as base to get the same functionality as portage. It wouldn't make any sense at all, but it would be possible.
While it may not be the first choice for veteran Linux users, [..] Well, if Linus Torvalds uses SuSE as his home system (and he does), that's good enough for me.
Slashdot Mirror
Because a dirty hack is all they need to sell to pointy haired bosses.
Quote robocop: "I had a guaranteed military sale with ED 209. Renevation (sp?) program, spare parts for 25 years... Who cares if it works or not?"
I think about it, just that line could be right out of Ballmer's mouth...
Also, when Microsoft sais "middle of the year", we shouldn't hold our breath. It can take a little bit longer...
With Linux, on the other hand, you can start right away with a fully optimized distribution and have all programs using Operon's features right from the start.
I don't know why anybody would want to throw everything out overnight.
But haven't it occured to you that maybe just stop upgrading Windows and using Linux boxes when the hardware needs to be replaced is a viable alternative.
That's what I would do.
Does that really matter?
If a vote is screwed up you only can do a second vote, no matter if the screw-up was intentional or not. Otherwise we could just roll dice.
The only democratic thing to do would be to do a partial (where people have been wrongly denied their right to vote) or complete second vote.
2: So you mean to tell me that when a president signs something it is meaningless and the next president can pretend it never happened?
5: OK, I don't have proof, but I think nuclear weapons clearly classify as weapons of mass destruction.
I think now I finally understand the slogan "land of the free, home of the brave".
On the one side, you have a political leader who has come to power through undemocratic means[1], who unilaterally breaks treaties[2], who doesn't care about UN-resolutions[3], doesn't care about basic human rights[4] and has weapons of mass destruction[5]. And on the other side you have Saddam Hussein.
Tough to pick a side.
1: Ballot-fraud in Florida,
2: Kyoto-agreement,
3: Invasion of Iraq, keeping prisoners in Cuba without lawsuit
4: This story plus keeping prisoners in Cuba without lawsuit
5: Obvious - about 20000 nuclear heads plus a lot more chemical and biological weapons.
I usually don't respond to trolls, but what the heck:
You mean like multiple desktops? (Unix: early 90's, Microsoft: 2001)
Or pasting with the middle mouse button?
Or a themable desktop? (KDE: 1997, Microsoft: 2001)
Or menu applets? (KDE: 1998(?))
Or mouse modifier keys for faster window manipulation? (Mac: early 90's, KDE: 1997, Microsoft: not yet)
Microsoft-shareholders. Because a money-losing venture that will never make a profit will take business away from Windows-software with something like 80% profit margin.
There is a very good reason why XBox USB ports are made incompatible to normal connectors. The reason is that the XBox must not compete with PCs.
Any good monitor (like 17'' TFT) costs over 500$ and is worth the money. Once you have worked on TFT, you will never go back to CRT...
I think you don't see what Microsoft does. Microsoft does not "diversify", they set up one money-losing adventure after another.
Just look at XBox. Would die within 2 weeks without Microsoft pouring cash into it. Or look at MSN. Would die without the cash infusions and without all the free surfers because they get the default page on Windows. Or look at MS Office - it creates a lot of cash but it also would die without Windows. Their keyboards and mice are also losing money.
Take Windows away from Microsoft and their whole empire is destroyed.
Anyway, before the defacement statistics sites were put down, IIS-defacements were at about 60-70% of all defacements.
If you count mass-infections like CodeRed, Nimda, etc. you probably get an IIS-share of over 95%.
I saw Phoenix as a very interesting and promising fork until development has essentially stopped. To see the Mozilla folk pick it up again is a relief.
Wow, you summarized my point, I'm proud of you.
Eye-candy was irrelevant in their decision in choosing the platform. That was exactly my point.
If aiming at technical people, then I agree eye-candy should be off by default. If aimed at less-technical people then leave it on. You only have to look at what WinXP and MacOS X look like, presumably based on large market research budgets, to see what the general public want.
Nonsense. The reason why they turn all that on by default is because it looks good on demo-machines which is necessary to get sold.
Day-to-day work is very different from trying stuff on a demo machine.
The primary reason for attacking Afghanistan was to boost up GWB's popularity and test some fancy weapons - I wouldn't see it as a failure at all.
Now tell me in what way the forced "minimized" animations are helping me. I mean there is only one dock, so I shouldn't get confused about where it will be minimized, or will I?
However I wouldn't like it as a default. Maybe if it's extremely successful and widely used in 1.4, you could make it the default in 1.5, but for now I wouldn't.
Of course all this is a matter of discussion...
Correct. Eye-candy was obviously irrelevant in choosing the platform.
Only technical-minded people STILL use Linux, not to mention a few years ago
That was correct (it isn't anymore, but that's another discussion). Eye-candy was irrelevant in choosing the platform.
Ads aren't eyecandy, they're just annoying
Yahoo also added a couple of other stuff, but OK, I'll give you that point.
Is there even something, I'm not even asking for proof, just a hint or some study that supports the hypothesis that less technical users want eye-candy?
I have several hard facts that are supporting the theory that less technical users don't give a shit about eye candy:
I also tried MacOSX. In the first 15 minutes, you are really blown away. It's smooth, everything is animated, everything looks good. After about 20 minutes, you get used to the effects, after an hour they just slow you down and go on your nerves. I could only choose between 2 different types of animation for minimize, so you can't even get rid of some of it.
If eye-candy gets into the way, it should be off by default, IMO and smooth-scrolling is a prime example.
Just because there is a workaround for it, doesn't make a bug a feature.
Even worse is:
1.) Enter "http://flaky.site.com/somepathyoudontremember" into URL-bar.
2.) Surf elsewhere around because you know that flaky.site.com is flaky and will take a while to load.
3.) If flaky.site.com is currently unavailable, the URL is replaced with "about:blank" and "somepathyoudontremember" is lost forever.
Konq is somewhat better in that, it doesn't mangle URLs of (currently) unavailable servers, so you can hit reload. (But it also does what is described in the parent, unfortunately.)
Well there are source-rpms - it would be very well possible to use srpm as base to get the same functionality as portage. It wouldn't make any sense at all, but it would be possible.
Yes, it detects wether you have edited a file and only overwrites, the global rc file is also gone.
Eh? Who's more veteran than Linus?