I think I'll wait for a more mature release before I go replacing my Award BIOS. As much as I love open source stuff, I don't want to deal with my BIOS being screwed up at the moment.
You could use a BIOS switcher tool like the Bios Savior. It sells for ~$20-30. With it, you can keep your known-working BIOS backed up, fool around with LinuxBIOS or other BIOS changes, and then if you can't boot or get locked out...switch back.
Cost: From ~$20 to ~$30 USD -- depending on the seller.
Disclaimer: I haven't used this...just passing it along. All BIOS upgrades I've done were for minor BIOS revisions or (if beta) after a few others had upgraded. Because of that, a BIOS backup tool like BIOS Savior is really overkill. For LinuxBIOS or other drastic changes, it sounds like an ideal tool.
"My ____" is degrading. It's like Microsoft saying "You little child, you don't know anything so I'll tell you what is yours".
Unfortunately, it's not even accurate. It only really applies to the computer not the person using the computer. Even with profiles, the local machine is the dominate factor under Windows not the user. Ironically, a network with X stations is more likely to be correct; the desktop, settings, programs, and any files are 'Mine' and the local machine is just a piece of machinery.
Yet, most novices I've talked to refer to specific programs as "My ____" as in "My Quicken" -- even before Microsoft started using the phrase.
If I use any gpl'ed code in my software, I HAVE to distribute the sources with the binaries. ffmpeg was lgpl, mplayer was gpl. They used code from both, which means they have to distribute the source.
Close, but not quite right. If you distribute binaries that came from GPLed source, you are required -- if asked by the recipient -- to provide usable source for a nominal fee. It happens to be that the common practice is to charge no fees yet this is not a requirement of the GPL.
Along those lines, if you distribute GPLed or LGPLed binaries along with binaries under a different license, you are only required to provide source for the GPL/LGPLed programs. The license for the other binaries is not impacted though it may have a source distribution requirement in it's licence.
As an additional example, if Bill makes a program and licenses it under the GPL...and uses no other GPLed code...Bill can change the license for that code at anytime. If Bill gets code from Jack, and Jack allows Bill to relicense Jack's code, Bill can do so. If Bill does not get Jack's approval, Bill has two GPL-compatable options:
There are actually multiple lobbies for tech related issues. Some are just starting out, though most have some efforts occuring right now.
The first that has to be mentioned -- even if some moderator is hostile to it -- is the grandaddy Free Software Foundation, though there are others if that one is somehow not to your liking;
Along those lines, some local shopping malls are starting to put adds on table tops...as if the floors, walls, and light fixtures weren't enough. The isles in toy stores have toys that speak up and try and sell themselves as you pass by.
You either lie, or you're stupid. It's very easy to buy a computer without Windows installed. Just don't be fooled and buy from somebody else than the big stores, mom & pops computer shops will happilly sell you one without an MS OS. I've been doing this since the days of XTs.
Personally, I build my own. Only my first system (4.77mhz 8088 -w- 128K), the two Suns, AIX, and my second hand Dell laptop weren't put together from parts. I've even built systems for friends with Linux pre-installed.
At work, building each system or buying from mom & pop shops aren't options.
It is unusual that I personally have the chance to pick out the number of systems needed to meet Dell's and other companies minimum order for a blank or Linux-pre install.
Note: You can easily get some companies not to install Windows. Now, look at the price difference between "With Windows" and "Without Windows". Except for Wallmart I can't think of any big company that will sell the "Without Windows" system for less. Because of that, it's not worth the hassle to even ask for systems without Windows...Microsoft still gets the money and my company saves nothing.
You do have a choice. But you have to choose to research and compare products before buying.
I agree that there are some systems available that have Linux pre-installed.
Wallmart's offering is basic. It has it's place but it isn't something I'd propose for a company or even someone looking for a cutting edge system.
Dell does not offer Linux on thier systems unless you order a boat load of them. Dell doesn't even advertise Linux as an option on dell.com! That elimiates both home and small office users. Corporate users -- not seeing Linux as a pre-installed option -- may order the systems with Windows only to wipe them out later.
Choices, yes, but damn few and not at all clear to those who don't already know.
Self-important posts like yours make me wish for a plonk feature on slashdot.
His comments seemed well reasoned to me.
What's your gripe exactly?
Re:That gives me an idea...
on
Fun With Wine
·
· Score: 1
Good points -- that I also happen to agree with.:)
Have you ever seen the movie Spinal Tap? Rember the scene where the band member insists that "This one goes to 11"? If not, rent it.
Mysql does run under Windows...check Mysql.com
on
Fun With Wine
·
· Score: 2
The Windows version of MySQL uses the Cygwin libraries.
Re:Wine with or without Windows?
on
Fun With Wine
·
· Score: 3, Informative
It is my understanding that Wine works best with a Windows install, preferrably Windows 95/98. Is that true? If so, why?
It used to be. When Wine began, it was basically a loader for the libraries that came with Windows to handle the Windows API calls. Now, Wine handles those Windows API calls itself so having a Windows partition around is not necessary.
That said, if you can't install a program under Wine does not mean that the program itself is incompatable with Wine. Having Windows around to install a program for Wine to use later can be useful.
Re:Wine's maturity as a product isn't quite enough
on
Fun With Wine
·
· Score: 2
I read these stories of people doing absolutely astonishing things using WINE, but what the rest of us (who only have a need to touch WINE when there is something that they Must Have that isn't available for Linux-- in my case, it was the FightAIDS@Home distributed-computing client) really need is a good, central repository of "How to get Program X to work under WINE" mini-tutorials.
A single guide for each and every program would be impossible to keep updated. Like most people, I have never heard of most Windows programs including the one that you mentioned above.
The next best thing is the Wine Application Database. The appdb lists specific programs and you can add yours to it so others know how well or poorly the programs you are interested in work.
Tip: If you search for the message that appears when the program fails to run, you might get directions on how to install another program that is similar and does work with Wine. (Then again, you might not...can't say!)
Re:Wonderful.
on
Fun With Wine
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Yes, with the GPLed version of Wine available at the main Wine site. Codeweavers puts polish on the GPLed version by adding an installer including tweaks. The effort they put into it is worth it.
To make this clear, here are links for running MS Word,
MS Excel, and
MS IE under Wine without paying any money to Codeweavers or any other company. You do pay with your time, though.
So my conclusion is: Linux IS stable! Extremly stable! The cause of 99% of the "linux crashes!"-bullshit is because of NVidia's crap-drivers (fast but unstable) and drivers still not "preemtive"-safe (ALSA on SMP for example).. But those things are not used on servers anyway.
I agree. The only time I've hung my systems
I can't speak for ALSA drives being bad -- when I used them they seemed to be fine -- but Nvidia's do cause regular hangs for me on an AMD Athlon system (Chipset: "VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82C686 [Apollo Super ACPI]"). Even adding mem=nopentium to the boot line and using Nvdia's latest drivers this system hangs on a regular basis.
The type of instability I get with Nvidia's drivers reminds me of the odd crashes I used to get when I used Windows. For what it's worth.
Re:CeBIT is better anyway
on
The Last Comdex?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I agree...even ~10 years ago CeBit was much better. That you don't have to walk all over the city to see everything is a big plus for CeBit too.
In the short term, when using Windows, the most stable and simplest thing you can do is use a VNC viewer pointed at a *nix box that has Evolution on it. Otherwise, take a look at these efforts to get Gnome and other programs ported using Cygwin;
Unfortunately, I don't see any new efforts at a port of Evolution to Windows, but as it improves folks will start to demand it everywhere they are.
Mac OSX users are much more lucky -- they can get Evolution right now. Fink lists it as a ported app.
It would be nice to have a Windows CD with all X apps so that folks can see that *nix systems aren't usually text-based or some ugly form of CDE. Till then, I've found the boot CD and full Debian distributionKnoppix to be an ideal introduction. Blew the socks off of a admin I showed it to who didn't know it was possible, and impressed others who like the idea of Linux but can't be bothered with actually learning anything (kids, job, wife, do the math).
The devil is always in the details. There's not much you can do about it...since there's always one extra detail you'll miss.
Case in point; Back when MFM hard drives were the only show in town, I built my first computer from parts. After a few weeks researching each part, I boldly went in and asked for a 1:1 hard drive controller -- paying extra for it -- along with the other premium pieces needed to build the beast.
Meaningless fact: The old MFM drives would not necessarily be fast enough to continuously read data. Instead, they would read a track, fill up, and then skip a track or more; the disk would have a 1:2, 1:3,... interleaving of tracks. If the drive and controller were in tune, the data could be read one track after another with no gaps; 1:1 interleave.
After putting it all together, I ran some tests and found that data was being read from the drive with a 1:2 interleave. When I accused the uber geek salesman back at the store of giving me the wrong parts, his only comment -- sealed with a grin -- was;
"That is a 1:1 controller -- just as you asked for. You didn't, though, ask for a 1:1 hard drive."
Since then, I've assumed that no matter how I plan something isn't going to be right.
Maybe. Does anyone else remember IBM OS/2? Excellent Windows compatibility was included all the way to OS/2 Warp and yet it didn't turn out to be the Windows killer.
While I think you're largely right, the OS/2 to Linux link is where we part ways. The following was posted on the the Linuxgames web site. The poster was responding to others who were advocating removing the choice for everyone of running Windows programs under Linux;
First off: OS/2's Windows layer wasn't emulation any more then Wine is. They are libraries and runtime environments. (~insert Wine FAQ entry here~)
OS/2's runtime environment for Windows apps was good -- for Windows 2.x and 3.x programs. It was good because it was based on Microsoft's own source code for Windows 3.x.
Because of that, you are right, there was no reason *when Windows 3.1 applications were most popular* for writing OS/2 specific applications even though the APIs were similar.
As soon as those new-fangled Win32 programs (everything shipping now), the support fell appart. IBM required Microsoft's good graces. Since it was Microsoft's code, IBM didn't have control.
The reason why it is a meaningless comparison; Wine _isn't_ under Microsoft's control. On the down side, every piece of compatability that the Wine (or WineX) is hard fought. That's why Wine is never claimed to be a drop-in version of Windows. The emphasis for Wine is on getting specific programs running. When the API changes, Wine can adapt (though slowly) since it doesn't care about the OS only the application layer.
That thread has some other gems, though sadly it looks like the trolls have reduced the s/n ratio to a point that Wine can't be discussed at all.
I'm not a moderator currently, though I'll lend my 2+ karm here by reposting it;
The Windows Media Player has a EULA which requires you to "have a license to a qualifying microsoft operating system". This issue has come up with the codeweavers crossover product:
You think logical fallacies are only something that apply to
philosophical arguments?
OK GigsVT -- you Pillar Of Logic and Exactitude -- let's break this
down...shall we?
I told a story that did not even hint at being the end all to beat all about
cancer and the various causes or sources of cancer in it's many forms. To
spell it out, it was an anecdote as can be seen in the choice of
intentionally personal words used while telling it. If you disagree,
pick any paragraph from my original post , and show how you were
mislead into thinking this was promoted as something more exacting.
In response to my original post, you wrote this;
I know very few people who don't smoke or drink, or both. We are
talking about a large chunk of the population there, well more than 50%.
Ask her how many of her patients she knew over the years that never ate food.
I bet she would have to think a lot harder. The clear conclusion is that food
causes cancer!
I'm not saying there isn't a correlation, or even possibly causation.. but
it's very easy to slip in post hoc ergo prompter hoc type arguments with this
stuff.
...and you accuse me of fallacies? Paragraph by paragraph, let's take a look
at your stunning logic;
Paragraph #1: The point of my first reply to this was that
you
restated my position but did not get it right . If you want to argue
against something, read what it says first and stop inventing strawmen.
Paragraph #2: Maybe food does cause cancer. Since this theory can't be tested, it is the fallacy of reduction to the absurd. Now, if you want to get really wacky, you can say something along the lines of "maybe oral ingestion causes
cancer". Maybe it does. If it can't be tested -- and thus proved true or false -- there's no point in mentioning it except as a cheap debating technique.
Paragraph #3: It's an anecdote. That's why it was posted using the style and form of an anecdote.
Three paragraphs containing two fallacies (stawman & reduction to absurdity) and one bit of arrogance.
Follow the thread. It looks like you are responding to the wrong person.
If not, feel free to explain since I've read your comments a few times (quoted below) and can't figure out what you mean.
Jeez, you got that Liberal Debate Style thing down cold don't ya?
Take a statement like "smoking increases cancer risk in general" and turn it into "Well, my mom never smoked and she got cancer so you're just plain wrong"
No way... and there's a big difference between drinking sometimes, and being an alchoholic. Well more than 50%? maybe 50%, but definatly less than 80%.
Thank you!
And we really know that it's cells that cause cancer:-)
But only on Tuesday -- hey, if cancer starts at some point, why not Tuesdays?
You missed "She went on to explain that most were both alcoholics and 1+ pack a day smokers, though nearly all the rest were either heavy smokers or drinkers."
Also, this is not a philosophical argument. It's not even a scientific statement of any riggor and was not asserted to be so.
Read people, please. The complaints here are meaningless in context.
Re:Commonality does not imply Causality
on
ECCp-109 Solved
·
· Score: 1
As I've said elsewhere: 'The comment I made was focused on a specific set of situations -- that was not claimed to apply in different situations -- and where there are exceptions. Take it for what it's worth.'
While 'commonality does not imply causality' in this case it is an indicator for research at a minimum and a strong hint that certian behaviors should be avoided because of the increased risk. It doesn't mean -- and I did not imply -- that cancer -- even for those areas of the body -- is caused only by alcohol and tobacco product use.
Agreed, or are you just complaining about the lack of philosophical rigor (something I didn't claim)?
As I've said elsewhere: 'The comment I made was focused on a specific set of situations -- that was not claimed to apply in different situations -- and where there are exceptions. Take it for what it's worth.'
Slashdot Mirror
You could use a BIOS switcher tool like the Bios Savior. It sells for ~$20-30. With it, you can keep your known-working BIOS backed up, fool around with LinuxBIOS or other BIOS changes, and then if you can't boot or get locked out...switch back.
Cost: From ~$20 to ~$30 USD -- depending on the seller.
Disclaimer: I haven't used this...just passing it along. All BIOS upgrades I've done were for minor BIOS revisions or (if beta) after a few others had upgraded. Because of that, a BIOS backup tool like BIOS Savior is really overkill. For LinuxBIOS or other drastic changes, it sounds like an ideal tool.
"My ____" is degrading. It's like Microsoft saying "You little child, you don't know anything so I'll tell you what is yours".
Unfortunately, it's not even accurate. It only really applies to the computer not the person using the computer. Even with profiles, the local machine is the dominate factor under Windows not the user. Ironically, a network with X stations is more likely to be correct; the desktop, settings, programs, and any files are 'Mine' and the local machine is just a piece of machinery.
Yet, most novices I've talked to refer to specific programs as "My ____" as in "My Quicken" -- even before Microsoft started using the phrase.
Personally, it annoys me.
Close, but not quite right. If you distribute binaries that came from GPLed source, you are required -- if asked by the recipient -- to provide usable source for a nominal fee. It happens to be that the common practice is to charge no fees yet this is not a requirement of the GPL.
Along those lines, if you distribute GPLed or LGPLed binaries along with binaries under a different license, you are only required to provide source for the GPL/LGPLed programs. The license for the other binaries is not impacted though it may have a source distribution requirement in it's licence.
As an additional example, if Bill makes a program and licenses it under the GPL...and uses no other GPLed code...Bill can change the license for that code at anytime. If Bill gets code from Jack, and Jack allows Bill to relicense Jack's code, Bill can do so. If Bill does not get Jack's approval, Bill has two GPL-compatable options:
There are actually multiple lobbies for tech related issues. Some are just starting out, though most have some efforts occuring right now.
The first that has to be mentioned -- even if some moderator is hostile to it -- is the grandaddy Free Software Foundation, though there are others if that one is somehow not to your liking;
Bruce Perens has 3 efforts at the Global Technology Policy Institute.
The folks at The Linux Show often promote two efforts; GeekPac and American Open Technology Consortium
...and I'm sure that is not a complete list. If you can't support one, support one of the others.
...
Everything will be computerized.
Advertisements will be everywhere.
Along those lines, some local shopping malls are starting to put adds on table tops...as if the floors, walls, and light fixtures weren't enough. The isles in toy stores have toys that speak up and try and sell themselves as you pass by.
Personally, I build my own. Only my first system (4.77mhz 8088 -w- 128K), the two Suns, AIX, and my second hand Dell laptop weren't put together from parts. I've even built systems for friends with Linux pre-installed.
At work, building each system or buying from mom & pop shops aren't options.
It is unusual that I personally have the chance to pick out the number of systems needed to meet Dell's and other companies minimum order for a blank or Linux-pre install.
Note: You can easily get some companies not to install Windows. Now, look at the price difference between "With Windows" and "Without Windows". Except for Wallmart I can't think of any big company that will sell the "Without Windows" system for less. Because of that, it's not worth the hassle to even ask for systems without Windows...Microsoft still gets the money and my company saves nothing.
You do have a choice. But you have to choose to research and compare products before buying.
I agree that there are some systems available that have Linux pre-installed.
Choices, yes, but damn few and not at all clear to those who don't already know.
His comments seemed well reasoned to me.
What's your gripe exactly?
Have you ever seen the movie Spinal Tap? Rember the scene where the band member insists that "This one goes to 11"? If not, rent it.
The Windows version of MySQL uses the Cygwin libraries.
It used to be. When Wine began, it was basically a loader for the libraries that came with Windows to handle the Windows API calls. Now, Wine handles those Windows API calls itself so having a Windows partition around is not necessary.
That said, if you can't install a program under Wine does not mean that the program itself is incompatable with Wine. Having Windows around to install a program for Wine to use later can be useful.
A single guide for each and every program would be impossible to keep updated. Like most people, I have never heard of most Windows programs including the one that you mentioned above.
The next best thing is the Wine Application Database. The appdb lists specific programs and you can add yours to it so others know how well or poorly the programs you are interested in work.
Tip: If you search for the message that appears when the program fails to run, you might get directions on how to install another program that is similar and does work with Wine. (Then again, you might not...can't say!)
The Wine FAQ has been updated reciently, and the Wine Knowledgebase is still helpful.
Note: The Wine-FAQ link listed above may move.
To make this clear, here are links for running MS Word, MS Excel, and MS IE under Wine without paying any money to Codeweavers or any other company. You do pay with your time, though.
I agree. The only time I've hung my systems
I can't speak for ALSA drives being bad -- when I used them they seemed to be fine -- but Nvidia's do cause regular hangs for me on an AMD Athlon system (Chipset: "VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82C686 [Apollo Super ACPI]"). Even adding mem=nopentium to the boot line and using Nvdia's latest drivers this system hangs on a regular basis.
The type of instability I get with Nvidia's drivers reminds me of the odd crashes I used to get when I used Windows. For what it's worth.
I agree...even ~10 years ago CeBit was much better. That you don't have to walk all over the city to see everything is a big plus for CeBit too.
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steven.obrien2/index. html
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=gnome&m=1010157075 21446&w=2
http://www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley/1596/en/c ygwin.html
Unfortunately, I don't see any new efforts at a port of Evolution to Windows, but as it improves folks will start to demand it everywhere they are.
Mac OSX users are much more lucky -- they can get Evolution right now. Fink lists it as a ported app.
It would be nice to have a Windows CD with all X apps so that folks can see that *nix systems aren't usually text-based or some ugly form of CDE. Till then, I've found the boot CD and full Debian distributionKnoppix to be an ideal introduction. Blew the socks off of a admin I showed it to who didn't know it was possible, and impressed others who like the idea of Linux but can't be bothered with actually learning anything (kids, job, wife, do the math).
Case in point; Back when MFM hard drives were the only show in town, I built my first computer from parts. After a few weeks researching each part, I boldly went in and asked for a 1:1 hard drive controller -- paying extra for it -- along with the other premium pieces needed to build the beast.
Meaningless fact: The old MFM drives would not necessarily be fast enough to continuously read data. Instead, they would read a track, fill up, and then skip a track or more; the disk would have a 1:2, 1:3, ... interleaving of tracks. If the drive and controller were in tune, the data could be read one track after another with no gaps; 1:1 interleave.
After putting it all together, I ran some tests and found that data was being read from the drive with a 1:2 interleave. When I accused the uber geek salesman back at the store of giving me the wrong parts, his only comment -- sealed with a grin -- was;
Since then, I've assumed that no matter how I plan something isn't going to be right.
While I think you're largely right, the OS/2 to Linux link is where we part ways. The following was posted on the the Linuxgames web site. The poster was responding to others who were advocating removing the choice for everyone of running Windows programs under Linux;
OS/2's runtime environment for Windows apps was good -- for Windows 2.x and 3.x programs. It was good because it was based on Microsoft's own source code for Windows 3.x.
Because of that, you are right, there was no reason *when Windows 3.1 applications were most popular* for writing OS/2 specific applications even though the APIs were similar.
As soon as those new-fangled Win32 programs (everything shipping now), the support fell appart. IBM required Microsoft's good graces. Since it was Microsoft's code, IBM didn't have control.
The reason why it is a meaningless comparison; Wine _isn't_ under Microsoft's control. On the down side, every piece of compatability that the Wine (or WineX) is hard fought. That's why Wine is never claimed to be a drop-in version of Windows. The emphasis for Wine is on getting specific programs running. When the API changes, Wine can adapt (though slowly) since it doesn't care about the OS only the application layer.
That thread has some other gems, though sadly it looks like the trolls have reduced the s/n ratio to a point that Wine can't be discussed at all.
The Windows Media Player has a EULA which requires you to "have a license to a qualifying microsoft operating system". This issue has come up with the codeweavers crossover product:
Nothing prevents Microsoft from doing the same thing with the Office 11 EULA.
OK GigsVT -- you Pillar Of Logic and Exactitude -- let's break this down...shall we?
I told a story that did not even hint at being the end all to beat all about cancer and the various causes or sources of cancer in it's many forms. To spell it out, it was an anecdote as can be seen in the choice of intentionally personal words used while telling it. If you disagree, pick any paragraph from my original post , and show how you were mislead into thinking this was promoted as something more exacting.
In response to my original post, you wrote this;
Ask her how many of her patients she knew over the years that never ate food. I bet she would have to think a lot harder. The clear conclusion is that food causes cancer!
I'm not saying there isn't a correlation, or even possibly causation.. but it's very easy to slip in post hoc ergo prompter hoc type arguments with this stuff.
...and you accuse me of fallacies? Paragraph by paragraph, let's take a look at your stunning logic;
Paragraph #2: Maybe food does cause cancer. Since this theory can't be tested, it is the fallacy of reduction to the absurd. Now, if you want to get really wacky, you can say something along the lines of "maybe oral ingestion causes cancer". Maybe it does. If it can't be tested -- and thus proved true or false -- there's no point in mentioning it except as a cheap debating technique.
Paragraph #3: It's an anecdote. That's why it was posted using the style and form of an anecdote.
Three paragraphs containing two fallacies (stawman & reduction to absurdity) and one bit of arrogance.
If not, feel free to explain since I've read your comments a few times (quoted below) and can't figure out what you mean.
Jeez, you got that Liberal Debate Style thing down cold don't ya?
Take a statement like "smoking increases cancer risk in general" and turn it into "Well, my mom never smoked and she got cancer so you're just plain wrong"
Where's the moderation for -1 fvcking idiot?
Thank you!
And we really know that it's cells that cause cancer :-)
But only on Tuesday -- hey, if cancer starts at some point, why not Tuesdays?
Also, this is not a philosophical argument. It's not even a scientific statement of any riggor and was not asserted to be so.
Read people, please. The complaints here are meaningless in context.
While 'commonality does not imply causality' in this case it is an indicator for research at a minimum and a strong hint that certian behaviors should be avoided because of the increased risk. It doesn't mean -- and I did not imply -- that cancer -- even for those areas of the body -- is caused only by alcohol and tobacco product use.
Agreed, or are you just complaining about the lack of philosophical rigor (something I didn't claim)?
As I've said elsewhere: 'The comment I made was focused on a specific set of situations -- that was not claimed to apply in different situations -- and where there are exceptions. Take it for what it's worth.'