But, regardless of it all, we still have Nautilus, right?? Ok, back to the merits of the program for just a minute: It sucks. It single-handedly sets GNOME back a couple years as far as useability goes.
Nautilus is extremely easy to use. It does not set the usability of Gnome back a couple years. It just seems that Nautilus suffered the same fate in its 1.0 release that Gnome 1.0 did: It was released many months to soon. Gnome 1.0.50 worked great, but Gnome 1.0 was less stable than 0.9x. Nautilus was pushed out the door. (It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why). Nautilus will be just fine, and so will Gnome.
You probably think I'm full of shit, so I guess we'll just have to wait six months and see who is right. --
This is the only Linux server in any of these benchmarks that made the top ten. It took the number one slot.
Maybe its meaningless, but so what? It indicates that Linux vendors are playing the game too now. Even if the benchmark is totally and completely false, at least the people previously using it to spread lies have to shut up a bit now.
Yes, any of those boxes will saturate your T3 line serving the static content they are being tested with. But it looks cool to the PHBs, and thus they're less likely to force people like me to develop products for windows because its "faster". I'll drink to that. --
A lot of this white paper is based on half-truths, lies, and problems with Linux that are a direct result of Microsoft's monopoly.
When I read any article, I need to have a reasonable degree of trust in the author. Either the author has to establish that trust in the article or I have to have been familiar with other works of the author that I have found to be accurate. (By "author", I mean either an actual author, or the company they work for.)
All it takes is one or two significant half-truths, "spins", or known falsities in an article to make me stop reading it. In such a case I normally will not read material from that source again and will cast serious doubt over any information I've received from that source before.
The article is obviously targeted at Microsoft-believers. The problem with the article is that even a very ignorant person should have a hard time swallowing at least a few of those points. And at that point they too will probably have difficulty believing the rest.
The obvious solution for Microsoft might be to call attention to specific problem areas of Linux that actually do exist. Problem is, last time they tried that, the Linux folks fixed the problems.
Nautilus *IS* an important piece of Gnome, and the only concern is whether development of Nautilus can continue without its developers being funded by this now defunct company. We'll have to wait and see who will stop development on Nautilus, and who will take over for them. The product might die, or it might reach goals that it never could have under the direct control of a for-profit company.
The loss of Eazel's services infrastructure won't be a blow to the Gnome community. Ximian offers many of the same services, as does Red Hat, and other distributions.
Regardless of what happens, thank you, Eazel, for GIVING us Nautilus. While born prematurely and still needing much work, this file manager has the most potential of any I've seen. If development continues and Nautilus is pushed to be the best at what it was always meant to be (just a really nice file manager), I think it may someday be hands down the best product of its kind. --
If you've got a Linux box and your browser dies when you're entering your life story into a textarea, there's always su'ing to root and doing a "cp/dev/mem/tmp/mem" running strings on it and then grepping it for words you remember typing. This has saved my ass many times when using web-based email. --
Re:Playing Quake like this causing health problems
on
PanQuake
·
· Score: 4
Hey you in there... unlock that door right this minute!!! I know what you're doing in there... don't you know that'll make you go blind? --
I'd be interessted in hearing how people get their PC hardware to last...
It's called good hardware.
Asus motherboards.
IBM, Seagate SCSI hard drives
NO IDE
Name brand ECC memory (like Crucial)
Good enclosures (I use the SuperMicro 760) --
How about just thinking of the GPL as a corporation?
(before I go on, I don't know if anyone else uses this analogy, so I don't mean to steal anyone else's idea here.)
Anyway lets call the company "GPL Inc." GPL Inc. produces proprietary software, just like any other normal company. Funny thing is, the cost of all this proprietary software to the public is $0. And just like any normal evil corporation, there is no way in HELL that they are going to let you see their code unless you are an employee.
But everything's okay, because it's REALLY EASY to get a job at GPL Inc., you need not even fill out an application. Downside is the pay sucks, and the dental plan just isn't going to happen any time soon. By working for GPL Inc., you have access to the source of their vast collection of proprietary software. Just like an employee of a normal company, you can work on that software and improve it. But since you're an employee of GPL Inc. whenever you work on that software, all the work you do is the property of GPL Inc.
If you're company sells Linux boxes, you're just reselling software from GPL Inc. If your employees work on that software, they're being contracted out to GPL Inc.
So herein lies the problem: GPL Inc. is a massive international corporation. They just might write more software and have more programmers than even MS does. They write some of the best software in the world and people are starting to realize it. They have partnerships with all the big players in the industry, with the obvious exception.
And that is called competition, which is a very very bad thing.
At my work we use thinner clients than most people do. All of the developers are running Linux, RH6.2 right now. Logins are centralized using NIS, and our home dirs and several of our key applications are hosted on the NFS server. The entire network is switched 100MBit ethernet. The idea is this:
1.) Anyone can use any workstation like it is their own.
2.) All your data is hosted on the server and is thus backed up. You only have access to/tmp on your local machine.
3.) If a machine dies, it doesn't matter. Chances are there is an extra one laying around, and if their isn't setup can be completed in 2hrs.
4.) Applications can be installed on the server and used by everyone.
Everyone in the department loves this setup, including those who have would have the authority to have a "standalone" machine if they wanted. This is really not relevant to most offices, as Windows is fairly incapable of being setup in this fashion in its current iteration. (And, yes, all you MS folks can bash away at how you can solve this problem using unbelievably skilled NT admins with unlimited budgets, but I'm talking about the real world here) --
Do you have any intention of substantiating this claim? Okay, I know you're just responding to someone who was attempting to create facts using anecdotal evidence, but you're adding credence to his claim here.
If you want to make a statement which is definitely not obvious (Personally it goes against my intuition, I would think Java is the fastest, but who cares what I think), then please make some justification.
If you steal my car, I suffer consequences. I no longer have a car. This is theft. There is a clear distinction here. Your analogy is flawed.
You say that stealing is "taking something without the owner's permission" The problem is the word "take." Taking implies removing something from the owner's possession. I have never "taken" an MP3 from anyone. One *copies* MP3s. This is copyright infringement. It is not theft.
My entire post in no way attempts to justify copyright infringement, only to help expose these issues:
1.) Copying copyrighted material is not stealing, it is copyright infringement.
2.) Copyright holders have blatantly lied when describing the effects of infringement in order to exaggerate the magnitude of the problem.
I'll sell you 100 shares of any company you want that has stock trading at $40/share. Because I like you, I will charge you only $39,000 for this stock.
You may then sell them to whoever is willing to pay $40 large for them, and make a reasonable profit while you're at it.
The appropriate moderation for my post is -1 troll, none of this offtopic/overrated crap please.
The legal term is infringement, and that's not debatable.
But if you want to talk in the practical sense instead of the legal sense, consider this: Is it stealing if I would not have bought it if I couldn't get it without paying for it? If you wouldn't have bought it anyway, what is it that you have stolen?
Personally I love the case the BSA makes about piracy: 1/3 (or something like that) of software is pirated, costing the software industry $X billion/year. This claim is entirely untrue. Not everyone who pirated the software would have paid for it. To guess, I imagine fewer than half of those people would have paid for it.
Then, of course, there is the case where piracy leads to purchase. I know of someone who pirated Photoshop in college and became proficient at it. He used the pirated copy at the Web design company he started. He's made millions, and now own many thousands of dollars worth of copies of Photoshop, and is entirely legal in his licensing of the product. Had he not broken the law and pirated their product, he would not have had the financial means to reach his position, and Adobe would thus have fewer sales.
IBM's investing a billion bucks in Linux...well, okay, maybe they're investing a billion bucks in their Linux strategy. If IBM becomes a leader in the Linux industry they will have to make the Linux industry quite a bit bigger in the process. I think this could be a very good thing.
Right now, pretty much anyone who is pushing Linux is a good guy to me. Anyone who helps Linux cut into Microsoft's market share by another percentage point has my vote. One more Linux (or any other *NIX) server instead of one more NT server increases the chances that my pager won't go off at 2:30am and I'll actually get a full night's sleep.
I don't really care what stupid ideas they have to use to get people to buy into it. I don't think anyone is truly going to be fooled into believing this crap except maybe the PHBs who got sold on using a desktop operating system on the server a few years back. These are the people that make the decisions and will fall for this kind of shit, so lets just pray they do.
Back in 1950 or so, my dad brought his shotgun to school. He rode to school with it across the handlebars of his bicycle. He put it in his locker for his first few classes. Then, while other students innocently entered an assembly, he walked out to his locker, got the shotgun and walked into the room where his classmates were waiting. Suddenly, without any warning to his fellow students, he strolled up to the front of the room with his gun and proceed to give a 20 minute presentation about how a shotgun worked.
Obviously this is all package based, but it works with deb and rpm. There is a menu option in RedCarpet 0.9.2's pulldown menu called "Install Local Packages". It will install and remove programs necessary to install the program you specify. (It tells you exactly what its going to do before it does it)
As an added bonus, it automatically verifies crypto signatures on everything.
I'm finding myself using this tool more and more for these reasons, even though I've become proficient in using RPM on the command-line for the past four years. It's just too convenient. ---
I can't believe that there isn't a single mention of Red Carpet in this entire thread except for some poor bastard who got moderated down to "0".
The obligatory link:
http://www.ximian.com/apps/redcarpet.php3
Anyway, this is THE TYPE of product that is necessary for newbies to use Linux. It lets you install packages you have downloaded yourself in addition to providing "channels" which contain many of the packages you might want. It also alerts you to updated software (possible security fixes) in those channels. Before installing a package, it automatically checks crytographic signatures. I think that a product like this with access to a broader software library than Ximian provides would take a significant chunk out of this problem.
Games are a prime example of intense periods of computation. So what I'd like to know is if anyone has noticed a sudden drop off in frame rates a few minutes into a game, possibly following by an alternating cycle of high and low performance priods?
Or is the cycling between full performance and throttled performance so small that it is perceived to average out to a constant FPS in a game?
I could imagine it being difficult to certainly attribute FPS changes to this, but I'm very curios to know if anyone has firsthand knowledge.
Thankfully when I bought my Athlon, the P4 cost about 5 or 6 times as much (when purchased w/lots of memory)
I can say one thing against the P4. The two people at work that got brand spanking new Dell w2k boxes with it weren't much impressed with it over their old 500MHz machines. ---
OMG, it is the same post. Well, I apologize for stealing your thunder. I had not read your post before, but I can certainly see where you're coming from. I even think your post is a helluva lot better done than mine.
Hell, no one even understood mine, now that/. and Linux aren't synonymous. (It's already been modded down)
Based on your comments however, I find it unlikely that *I* am the one who is acting like an asshole.
You are correct that my anecdotal evidence is just as meaningless.
So, here's some not-so-anecdotal evidence:
- Linux games do not update any libraries on your Linux system. They REQUIRE libraries. Or they provide libraries which are for their own use, and reside only in their own directory hierarchy. Many Windows games will update system DLLs, as is the norm for Windows software. Updating system DLLs without great care results in a condition commonly referred to as "DLL Hell" on a Windows9x-based machine.
- Linux does not require rebooting for installation of new software. Windows often does.
- Any decent Linux software is either packaged or installs entirely in its own directory (or in appropriate unique/bin,/lib/,/share... directories. Package management on a Linux system controls ownership of ever file resulting in clean uninstallation, where on a Windows machine, an uninstall can often delete critical DLLs.
Everything I've said has actually happened to me. And I've seen similar situations on other peoples 98/me/2k boxes. Mechwarrior4 has blown up several of my friends 2k boxes to the point where they needed to be reinstalled. (who makes Mech4 again...and what ever happened to this "windows file protection" feature that was supposed to make this scenario impossible?)
If you install the OS, updates, video drivers, and then DirectX, in that order, you should be fine. I've personally found that once more updates, better video drivers, and new DirectX versions come out, it won't be long before your system hoses itself off.
Your anecdotal evidence of 98 is meaningless. My Dad ONLY uses Word and has thus never seen Windows 95 crash in several years of use. Big deal.
I find Linux games to be easier to install than Windows games. This is because I know how to install both, and installing the Linux ones take less time... hence, they are "easier to install".
I don't have to reboot. I don't have to worry about the game installation causing my system to reboot into "safe mode". I don't have to reboot, again. I don't have to delete five AOL icons from my desktop, start menu, and system tray (or their GNOME equivalents). I don't have to reboot after I play the game. I don't have to reinstall the applications that the game broke by overwriting critical shared libraries. I don't have to reboot after the system crashes every second time I start the game if its the first thing I launch after I log in.
All I have to do, is read the !@#$!@#$ directions and type exactly what they say and the game works. ---
Slashdot Mirror
Nautilus is extremely easy to use. It does not set the usability of Gnome back a couple years. It just seems that Nautilus suffered the same fate in its 1.0 release that Gnome 1.0 did: It was released many months to soon. Gnome 1.0.50 worked great, but Gnome 1.0 was less stable than 0.9x. Nautilus was pushed out the door. (It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why). Nautilus will be just fine, and so will Gnome.
You probably think I'm full of shit, so I guess we'll just have to wait six months and see who is right.
--
This is the only Linux server in any of these benchmarks that made the top ten. It took the number one slot.
w eb 99.htm
Maybe its meaningless, but so what? It indicates that Linux vendors are playing the game too now. Even if the benchmark is totally and completely false, at least the people previously using it to spread lies have to shut up a bit now.
Here's another great example of this:
http://www.dell.com/us/en/bsd/topics/linux_spec
Yes, any of those boxes will saturate your T3 line serving the static content they are being tested with. But it looks cool to the PHBs, and thus they're less likely to force people like me to develop products for windows because its "faster". I'll drink to that.
--
A lot of this white paper is based on half-truths, lies, and problems with Linux that are a direct result of Microsoft's monopoly.
When I read any article, I need to have a reasonable degree of trust in the author. Either the author has to establish that trust in the article or I have to have been familiar with other works of the author that I have found to be accurate. (By "author", I mean either an actual author, or the company they work for.)
All it takes is one or two significant half-truths, "spins", or known falsities in an article to make me stop reading it. In such a case I normally will not read material from that source again and will cast serious doubt over any information I've received from that source before.
The article is obviously targeted at Microsoft-believers. The problem with the article is that even a very ignorant person should have a hard time swallowing at least a few of those points. And at that point they too will probably have difficulty believing the rest.
The obvious solution for Microsoft might be to call attention to specific problem areas of Linux that actually do exist. Problem is, last time they tried that, the Linux folks fixed the problems.
--
Eazel is in no way an important piece of Gnome.
Nautilus *IS* an important piece of Gnome, and the only concern is whether development of Nautilus can continue without its developers being funded by this now defunct company. We'll have to wait and see who will stop development on Nautilus, and who will take over for them. The product might die, or it might reach goals that it never could have under the direct control of a for-profit company.
The loss of Eazel's services infrastructure won't be a blow to the Gnome community. Ximian offers many of the same services, as does Red Hat, and other distributions.
Regardless of what happens, thank you, Eazel, for GIVING us Nautilus. While born prematurely and still needing much work, this file manager has the most potential of any I've seen. If development continues and Nautilus is pushed to be the best at what it was always meant to be (just a really nice file manager), I think it may someday be hands down the best product of its kind.
--
If you've got a Linux box and your browser dies when you're entering your life story into a textarea, there's always su'ing to root and doing a "cp /dev/mem /tmp/mem" running strings on it and then grepping it for words you remember typing. This has saved my ass many times when using web-based email.
--
Hey you in there... unlock that door right this minute!!! I know what you're doing in there... don't you know that'll make you go blind?
--
I'd be interessted in hearing how people get their PC hardware to last... It's called good hardware. Asus motherboards. IBM, Seagate SCSI hard drives NO IDE Name brand ECC memory (like Crucial) Good enclosures (I use the SuperMicro 760)
--
How about just thinking of the GPL as a corporation?
(before I go on, I don't know if anyone else uses this analogy, so I don't mean to steal anyone else's idea here.)
Anyway lets call the company "GPL Inc." GPL Inc. produces proprietary software, just like any other normal company. Funny thing is, the cost of all this proprietary software to the public is $0. And just like any normal evil corporation, there is no way in HELL that they are going to let you see their code unless you are an employee.
But everything's okay, because it's REALLY EASY to get a job at GPL Inc., you need not even fill out an application. Downside is the pay sucks, and the dental plan just isn't going to happen any time soon. By working for GPL Inc., you have access to the source of their vast collection of proprietary software. Just like an employee of a normal company, you can work on that software and improve it. But since you're an employee of GPL Inc. whenever you work on that software, all the work you do is the property of GPL Inc.
If you're company sells Linux boxes, you're just reselling software from GPL Inc. If your employees work on that software, they're being contracted out to GPL Inc.
So herein lies the problem: GPL Inc. is a massive international corporation. They just might write more software and have more programmers than even MS does. They write some of the best software in the world and people are starting to realize it. They have partnerships with all the big players in the industry, with the obvious exception.
And that is called competition, which is a very very bad thing.
--
Now it is at 71.39 Mbps.
They are on a 100mbps connection.
Why exactly does using 71.39% cause a problem?
--
At my work we use thinner clients than most people do. All of the developers are running Linux, RH6.2 right now. Logins are centralized using NIS, and our home dirs and several of our key applications are hosted on the NFS server. The entire network is switched 100MBit ethernet. The idea is this:
/tmp on your local machine.
1.) Anyone can use any workstation like it is their own.
2.) All your data is hosted on the server and is thus backed up. You only have access to
3.) If a machine dies, it doesn't matter. Chances are there is an extra one laying around, and if their isn't setup can be completed in 2hrs.
4.) Applications can be installed on the server and used by everyone.
Everyone in the department loves this setup, including those who have would have the authority to have a "standalone" machine if they wanted. This is really not relevant to most offices, as Windows is fairly incapable of being setup in this fashion in its current iteration. (And, yes, all you MS folks can bash away at how you can solve this problem using unbelievably skilled NT admins with unlimited budgets, but I'm talking about the real world here)
--
PHP is faster than Perl or Java
Do you have any intention of substantiating this claim? Okay, I know you're just responding to someone who was attempting to create facts using anecdotal evidence, but you're adding credence to his claim here.
If you want to make a statement which is definitely not obvious (Personally it goes against my intuition, I would think Java is the fastest, but who cares what I think), then please make some justification.
If you steal my car, I suffer consequences. I no longer have a car. This is theft. There is a clear distinction here. Your analogy is flawed.
You say that stealing is "taking something without the owner's permission" The problem is the word "take." Taking implies removing something from the owner's possession. I have never "taken" an MP3 from anyone. One *copies* MP3s. This is copyright infringement. It is not theft.
My entire post in no way attempts to justify copyright infringement, only to help expose these issues:
1.) Copying copyrighted material is not stealing, it is copyright infringement.
2.) Copyright holders have blatantly lied when describing the effects of infringement in order to exaggerate the magnitude of the problem.
I'll sell you 100 shares of any company you want that has stock trading at $40/share. Because I like you, I will charge you only $39,000 for this stock.
You may then sell them to whoever is willing to pay $40 large for them, and make a reasonable profit while you're at it.
The appropriate moderation for my post is -1 troll, none of this offtopic/overrated crap please.
The legal term is infringement, and that's not debatable.
But if you want to talk in the practical sense instead of the legal sense, consider this: Is it stealing if I would not have bought it if I couldn't get it without paying for it? If you wouldn't have bought it anyway, what is it that you have stolen?
Personally I love the case the BSA makes about piracy: 1/3 (or something like that) of software is pirated, costing the software industry $X billion/year. This claim is entirely untrue. Not everyone who pirated the software would have paid for it. To guess, I imagine fewer than half of those people would have paid for it.
Then, of course, there is the case where piracy leads to purchase. I know of someone who pirated Photoshop in college and became proficient at it. He used the pirated copy at the Web design company he started. He's made millions, and now own many thousands of dollars worth of copies of Photoshop, and is entirely legal in his licensing of the product. Had he not broken the law and pirated their product, he would not have had the financial means to reach his position, and Adobe would thus have fewer sales.
IBM's investing a billion bucks in Linux...well, okay, maybe they're investing a billion bucks in their Linux strategy. If IBM becomes a leader in the Linux industry they will have to make the Linux industry quite a bit bigger in the process. I think this could be a very good thing.
Right now, pretty much anyone who is pushing Linux is a good guy to me. Anyone who helps Linux cut into Microsoft's market share by another percentage point has my vote. One more Linux (or any other *NIX) server instead of one more NT server increases the chances that my pager won't go off at 2:30am and I'll actually get a full night's sleep.
I don't really care what stupid ideas they have to use to get people to buy into it. I don't think anyone is truly going to be fooled into believing this crap except maybe the PHBs who got sold on using a desktop operating system on the server a few years back. These are the people that make the decisions and will fall for this kind of shit, so lets just pray they do.
Back in 1950 or so, my dad brought his shotgun to school. He rode to school with it across the handlebars of his bicycle. He put it in his locker for his first few classes. Then, while other students innocently entered an assembly, he walked out to his locker, got the shotgun and walked into the room where his classmates were waiting. Suddenly, without any warning to his fellow students, he strolled up to the front of the room with his gun and proceed to give a 20 minute presentation about how a shotgun worked.
Obviously this is all package based, but it works with deb and rpm. There is a menu option in RedCarpet 0.9.2's pulldown menu called "Install Local Packages". It will install and remove programs necessary to install the program you specify. (It tells you exactly what its going to do before it does it)
As an added bonus, it automatically verifies crypto signatures on everything.
I'm finding myself using this tool more and more for these reasons, even though I've become proficient in using RPM on the command-line for the past four years. It's just too convenient.
---
I can't believe that there isn't a single mention of Red Carpet in this entire thread except for some poor bastard who got moderated down to "0".
The obligatory link:
http://www.ximian.com/apps/redcarpet.php3
Anyway, this is THE TYPE of product that is necessary for newbies to use Linux. It lets you install packages you have downloaded yourself in addition to providing "channels" which contain many of the packages you might want. It also alerts you to updated software (possible security fixes) in those channels. Before installing a package, it automatically checks crytographic signatures. I think that a product like this with access to a broader software library than Ximian provides would take a significant chunk out of this problem.
---
Games are a prime example of intense periods of computation. So what I'd like to know is if anyone has noticed a sudden drop off in frame rates a few minutes into a game, possibly following by an alternating cycle of high and low performance priods?
Or is the cycling between full performance and throttled performance so small that it is perceived to average out to a constant FPS in a game?
I could imagine it being difficult to certainly attribute FPS changes to this, but I'm very curios to know if anyone has firsthand knowledge.
Thankfully when I bought my Athlon, the P4 cost about 5 or 6 times as much (when purchased w/lots of memory)
I can say one thing against the P4. The two people at work that got brand spanking new Dell w2k boxes with it weren't much impressed with it over their old 500MHz machines.
---
Thanks, sorry to infer that you were such... never actually seen anyone apologize on this site before. I can certainly see what pissed you off though.
Now, whoever the hell modded your last post down, is in fact, THE asshole.
---
OMG, it is the same post. Well, I apologize for stealing your thunder. I had not read your post before, but I can certainly see where you're coming from. I even think your post is a helluva lot better done than mine.
/. and Linux aren't synonymous. (It's already been modded down)
Hell, no one even understood mine, now that
Based on your comments however, I find it unlikely that *I* am the one who is acting like an asshole.
---
You are correct that my anecdotal evidence is just as meaningless.
/bin,/lib/,/share... directories. Package management on a Linux system controls ownership of ever file resulting in clean uninstallation, where on a Windows machine, an uninstall can often delete critical DLLs.
So, here's some not-so-anecdotal evidence:
- Linux games do not update any libraries on your Linux system. They REQUIRE libraries. Or they provide libraries which are for their own use, and reside only in their own directory hierarchy. Many Windows games will update system DLLs, as is the norm for Windows software. Updating system DLLs without great care results in a condition commonly referred to as "DLL Hell" on a Windows9x-based machine.
- Linux does not require rebooting for installation of new software. Windows often does.
- Any decent Linux software is either packaged or installs entirely in its own directory (or in appropriate unique
---
...I'm supposed to PAY for this?
---
You are exaggerating.
Everything I've said has actually happened to me. And I've seen similar situations on other peoples 98/me/2k boxes. Mechwarrior4 has blown up several of my friends 2k boxes to the point where they needed to be reinstalled. (who makes Mech4 again...and what ever happened to this "windows file protection" feature that was supposed to make this scenario impossible?)
If you install the OS, updates, video drivers, and then DirectX, in that order, you should be fine. I've personally found that once more updates, better video drivers, and new DirectX versions come out, it won't be long before your system hoses itself off.
Your anecdotal evidence of 98 is meaningless. My Dad ONLY uses Word and has thus never seen Windows 95 crash in several years of use. Big deal.
---
I find Linux games to be easier to install than Windows games. This is because I know how to install both, and installing the Linux ones take less time... hence, they are "easier to install".
I don't have to reboot. I don't have to worry about the game installation causing my system to reboot into "safe mode". I don't have to reboot, again. I don't have to delete five AOL icons from my desktop, start menu, and system tray (or their GNOME equivalents). I don't have to reboot after I play the game. I don't have to reinstall the applications that the game broke by overwriting critical shared libraries. I don't have to reboot after the system crashes every second time I start the game if its the first thing I launch after I log in.
All I have to do, is read the !@#$!@#$ directions and type exactly what they say and the game works.
---