So what you're saying is ATI doesn't work (well enough) on Linux? You just proved Miguel's point;
We as an open source community, we don't seem to get our act together when it comes to understanding the needs of end users on the desktop.
One of those "needs" is the ability to use an ATI card (since a lot of people have them). Your reasoning that everyone should just use an NVIDIA card just doesn't fly. The OS needs better ATI drivers, stop making excuses.
In order to get the microphone working on my Ubuntu Lucid, I had to recompile ALSA from source, and go through about 30 steps to get it installed. This was fine for me, or probably anyone else here as we are pretty technical, but how can we expect normal users to be able to do this?
By "video" he may be referring to 3d accelerated games maybe? To play a Windows game on Linux can take hours of config time, to find out that it a) doesnt work at all or b) has 50% the performance as if you were running Windows.
Don't get me wrong, I love Linux, and use Ubuntu as my primary OS, but I have to dual boot Windows in order to play games at anywhere close to decent performance.
Q: How is Adobe going to react to HTML5?
A: I wouldn’t say reacting to HTML5. We see whatever people are using to express themselves. We’re going to make great tooling for HTML5. We’re going to make the best tools in the world for HTML 5.
It’s not about HTML 5 vs Flash. They’re mutually beneficial. The more important question is the freedom of choice on the web.
Actionscript is neat and all, but javascript is a decent replacement for it. Javascript just has a bad name because so many amateurs use it poorly, and it is a slightly different paradigm (functional, prototype-based) than traditional c++/java/VB that professionals are used to. Its proper use has come a long way in the past few years though.
I've been looking, and while I've seen a few bloggers back up my story, I haven't been able to find an article I read last year, which quoted them as saying such.
Just think about their *profitable* product lines though - all authoring tools (think Photoshop, Acrobat, Dreamweaver and their ilk)
You must be new here. Adobe has come out publicly and said that HTML5 doesn't scare them because they know their plugin does not have much of a future. They want to sell authoring software, that is their entire business model. As far as Apple is concerned I don't think they really care what SJ has to say one way or another.
I like how you say "You Android folks were saying this" as if we all speak in one voice. Just because you read some nutjob on a blog somewhere say this doesn't mean the rest of us were this dillusional. Noone should be expecting to buy a tablet of any level of quality for $300 in the near future.
Except a lot of people don't consider Apple devices "premium" and Android "normal".
I consider Android "normal" and Apple "piece of shit I wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole".
If Android tablets were TWICE the price of an Apple one, I'd still buy Android.
So startup some domestic CFL plants? The fact that manufacturing jobs are moving to China is a systemic problem due to higher wage expectations at home and the fact that most americans do not want to work in the manufacturing sector anyways. Incandescent manufacturing is just as vulnerable to offshoring as CFL manufacturing... so I don't see the relevance.
I completely agree with you. If we could put a giant tax on coal, and keep this ban (or at least reduce it to a tax on less efficient bulbs) we might actually get somewhere towards solving the energy crisis. Both measures are needed, thats why I am in favor of carbon emissions taxes, and it looks like you are too.
Well you could tax them, ban them, or add other disincentives to their use. They went with ban. I don't necessarily agree with a full-out ban, I'm just stating the the "let the market decide" argument is extremely flawed when it comes to environmental issues.
I'm pretty sure the constitution doesn't limit what government can legislate, except for the pretty specific clauses ensuring specific kinds of fundamental individual freedoms such as freedom of speech, association, freedom from arbitrary incarceration, and several other specific limitations on the government's scope of power.
Offtopic, but yes, the constitution does limit what the goverment can legislate. Enumerated Powers
In short, the federal government is only allowed to legislate what the constitution expressly allows them to.
In this case I guess we could perhaps go with:
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
Except technically that's only between states(etc)
If that fails they could always use:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imports and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; [Altered by Amendment XVI "Income tax".]
And just tax the fuck out of incandescants.
Note: IANAL. also IANAA (I am not an American) so I could be wrong
PS: I am not saying one way or another whether incandescant bulbs or CFLs are better in terms of externalities as I'm not well versed in the specifics and I've heard the CFLs have some rather nasty, environment-destroying chemicals in them. I am only trying to make the point that in situations like this, the government is within its rights to intervene in order to protect other people from loss that you may inflict upon them without their consent.
Tragedy of the commons Externality Social Cost
This is why the government is justified to step in. Free market capitalism does not work when the above forces are in play. You as a consumer deciding on a product based upon your own rational self-interest (one of the fundamentals of capitalism) will most likely pick a product whose use will have negative consequences for others - others that did not enter into any contract with you.
Oblig car analogy: Your choice to drive a gas-guzzling SUV affects the quality of the air I breathe. I had no choice in your purchase therefore I should not have to bear the external cost (my air quality) of your decision.
What you're talking about is the called the Tragedy of the commons. If your actions as a consumer have any Externalities, the government is perfectly justified in stepping in.
It is a sad nuisance we have to live with since they people (the producers) keep using it instead of the various better systems out there.
Please excuse my ignorance, could you point me in the direction of these better systems?
Main criteria (IMHO) is the ability to send payments without giving the seller your CC #
Well they don't exactly put it on that page... I'm not spending more time on Apple's site then I have to. Any other store just tells you the damn price in their marketing.
Seriously, how much do these things cost? Looks like they don't want you to know since they are probably a 50% markup over comparable laptops from other manufacturers.
Slashdot Mirror
We as an open source community, we don't seem to get our act together when it comes to understanding the needs of end users on the desktop.
One of those "needs" is the ability to use an ATI card (since a lot of people have them). Your reasoning that everyone should just use an NVIDIA card just doesn't fly. The OS needs better ATI drivers, stop making excuses.
In order to get the microphone working on my Ubuntu Lucid, I had to recompile ALSA from source, and go through about 30 steps to get it installed. This was fine for me, or probably anyone else here as we are pretty technical, but how can we expect normal users to be able to do this?
By "video" he may be referring to 3d accelerated games maybe? To play a Windows game on Linux can take hours of config time, to find out that it a) doesnt work at all or b) has 50% the performance as if you were running Windows.
Don't get me wrong, I love Linux, and use Ubuntu as my primary OS, but I have to dual boot Windows in order to play games at anywhere close to decent performance.
Is going to be creating some gmail accounts via TOR and sending them some "confessions" this weekend?
Q: How is Adobe going to react to HTML5?
A: I wouldn’t say reacting to HTML5. We see whatever people are using to express themselves. We’re going to make great tooling for HTML5. We’re going to make the best tools in the world for HTML 5.
It’s not about HTML 5 vs Flash. They’re mutually beneficial. The more important question is the freedom of choice on the web.
Actionscript is neat and all, but javascript is a decent replacement for it. Javascript just has a bad name because so many amateurs use it poorly, and it is a slightly different paradigm (functional, prototype-based) than traditional c++/java/VB that professionals are used to. Its proper use has come a long way in the past few years though.
I've been looking, and while I've seen a few bloggers back up my story, I haven't been able to find an article I read last year, which quoted them as saying such.
Just think about their *profitable* product lines though - all authoring tools (think Photoshop, Acrobat, Dreamweaver and their ilk)
You must be new here. Adobe has come out publicly and said that HTML5 doesn't scare them because they know their plugin does not have much of a future. They want to sell authoring software, that is their entire business model. As far as Apple is concerned I don't think they really care what SJ has to say one way or another.
I like how you say "You Android folks were saying this" as if we all speak in one voice. Just because you read some nutjob on a blog somewhere say this doesn't mean the rest of us were this dillusional. Noone should be expecting to buy a tablet of any level of quality for $300 in the near future.
Except a lot of people don't consider Apple devices "premium" and Android "normal".
I consider Android "normal" and Apple "piece of shit I wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole".
If Android tablets were TWICE the price of an Apple one, I'd still buy Android.
So startup some domestic CFL plants? The fact that manufacturing jobs are moving to China is a systemic problem due to higher wage expectations at home and the fact that most americans do not want to work in the manufacturing sector anyways. Incandescent manufacturing is just as vulnerable to offshoring as CFL manufacturing... so I don't see the relevance.
I completely agree with you. If we could put a giant tax on coal, and keep this ban (or at least reduce it to a tax on less efficient bulbs) we might actually get somewhere towards solving the energy crisis. Both measures are needed, thats why I am in favor of carbon emissions taxes, and it looks like you are too.
This has nothing to do with labor. Not sure where you're getting that from. The externality is the environmental impact.
Well you could tax them, ban them, or add other disincentives to their use. They went with ban. I don't necessarily agree with a full-out ban, I'm just stating the the "let the market decide" argument is extremely flawed when it comes to environmental issues.
I'm pretty sure the constitution doesn't limit what government can legislate, except for the pretty specific clauses ensuring specific kinds of fundamental individual freedoms such as freedom of speech, association, freedom from arbitrary incarceration, and several other specific limitations on the government's scope of power.
Offtopic, but yes, the constitution does limit what the goverment can legislate.
Enumerated Powers
In short, the federal government is only allowed to legislate what the constitution expressly allows them to.
In this case I guess we could perhaps go with:
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
Except technically that's only between states(etc)
If that fails they could always use:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imports and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; [Altered by Amendment XVI "Income tax".]
And just tax the fuck out of incandescants.
Note: IANAL. also IANAA (I am not an American) so I could be wrong
Free market capitalism does not work here
Please see my post here. Free market capitalism does not work for cases like this that have externalities.
PS: I am not saying one way or another whether incandescant bulbs or CFLs are better in terms of externalities as I'm not well versed in the specifics and I've heard the CFLs have some rather nasty, environment-destroying chemicals in them. I am only trying to make the point that in situations like this, the government is within its rights to intervene in order to protect other people from loss that you may inflict upon them without their consent.
I'll just leave this here
Tragedy of the commons
Externality
Social Cost
This is why the government is justified to step in. Free market capitalism does not work when the above forces are in play. You as a consumer deciding on a product based upon your own rational self-interest (one of the fundamentals of capitalism) will most likely pick a product whose use will have negative consequences for others - others that did not enter into any contract with you.
Oblig car analogy: Your choice to drive a gas-guzzling SUV affects the quality of the air I breathe. I had no choice in your purchase therefore I should not have to bear the external cost (my air quality) of your decision.
What you're talking about is the called the Tragedy of the commons. If your actions as a consumer have any Externalities, the government is perfectly justified in stepping in.
It is a sad nuisance we have to live with since they people (the producers) keep using it instead of the various better systems out there.
Please excuse my ignorance, could you point me in the direction of these better systems?
Main criteria (IMHO) is the ability to send payments without giving the seller your CC #
/agree I was starting to like it after a while, then I heard they killed it. Now I don't really care to watch the rest knowing its over.
Well they don't exactly put it on that page... I'm not spending more time on Apple's site then I have to. Any other store just tells you the damn price in their marketing.
Seriously, how much do these things cost? Looks like they don't want you to know since they are probably a 50% markup over comparable laptops from other manufacturers.
Multiple Variants of Android Virus 'Hong Tou Tou' Surface in China
yes... the FOSS ones won't even run most games I've tried, they just segfault.