Precisely. I've seen the same trend in snow blowers. They make the throwers out of plastic now, even the crazy expensive ones, so they pop off constantly. The engines go bad after a few years (seriously, these things are used a very limited number of times a year and they STILL go bad that quickly). Even the fuel lines dissolve quicker.
The one I'm using is nearly 20 years old, and it's built like a rock. It churns through anything and it keeps on chugging along. It requires a few minor repairs every few years, but that's about it.
Oh wow. That's such a major change.
Beyond that, Wikipedia and a solitary Economist article are not exactly causes for much cheer or evidence that usage has increased to any significant degree.
So, I would say the Linux community has plenty to thank Canonical for.
A less than one percent usage increase that no one can verify and where Mac OS X has probably increased at it and Windows's expense? Wow.
When the increase is 60-something percent, yes, I'd say that's significant. That's like increasing your investment of $10,000 to $16,000. Then your attitude is like turning down that $16,000 because it isn't close to Gates' $billions. What, you think this shit happens overnight?
In other words: you're batshit crazy, and honestly, you're really grasping at straws to cover your ignorant ass here.
Exactly. I ABHORE this new feature with a fiery passion. The fact that it's on by default is annoying, and the fact that you actually have to start typing in the search box in order to even turn it off is more annoying... but the fact that once you turn it off, you lose your query and start over from scratch just tops it off. I rage every time.
One of the reasons I used Google over other search engines before was it's simplicity. There was no huge annoying banner ads or other distractions. Now there is.
It may be time to venture out and try some others once again.
Standards are important but without fancy technology buzzwords I don't think the IT department would ever get funding.
You're probably right. The downside is you end up hiring people based on their "qualifications" that consist of listing a buzzword on their resume. Or when some marketing guy gets it stuck in their head and thinks they know how to do your job. Or when your site becomes a mess because someone in management insists that you include all these buzzword "technologies" in order to be on the "cutting edge".
I don't see where you've proved your point. Except for XBMC, which I haven't used, I'd take the Windows product over Linux any day. Apache is especially bad, it's old and tired, just let it die already.
You have any frame of reference for that? How is it "old and tired"? You clearly have no clue what you are talking about. Apache isn't even restricted to Linux. And it doesn't even stop at Apache, as there are at least half a dozen high quality OSS web servers out there that IIS can't possibly compare to.
But back to Apache. Apache is deployed on far more servers as the web server of choice. You can find these statistics anywhere. Not only is it faster, it's far more reliable, especially when deployed in a Linux server.
It doesn't even stop there. In the area of media players, Microsoft can't seem to beat anybody, closed OR open source. Their mobile OS is utterly pathetic, and I think it's safe to say Android is far batter. If desktop eye candy is your thing, OSS wins again (compiz). Hell, even menu and navigation systems win. OS choice on embedded systems? OSS wins. Graphics suite? OSS (Photoshop is NOT Microsoft). The only things Microsoft seems to have going for them is the fact that their Office suite is still unparalleled, and they're so big that they have all the big vendors producing software for them (such as Adobe).
Ubuntu has done amazing work getting Linux more visible and better established, that alone is worth a significant amount.
How and where? Linux desktop usage or applications support has not increased one iota in the last six years, so I'm curious as to where this standard excuse for Ubuntu comes from. The difficulty people have is that Ubuntu's place in the free desktop world simply cannot be measured beyond free CDs and simple marketing blurb.
Where the hell are you getting the idea that usage hasn't increased in the last 6 years?
According to W3Counter webpage hits the Linux desktop market share increased 62% from 1.32% to 2.13% between mid 2007 and the beginning of 2009, while Windows use fell from 95.52% to 88.77% in the same period, a drop of 7%.
And then, under "Reasons for Adoption":
A report in The Economist in December 2007 said: "Linux has swiftly become popular in small businesses and the home. That’s largely the doing of Gutsy Gibbon, the code-name for the Ubuntu 7.10 from Canonical. Along with distributions such as Linspire, Mint, Xandros, OpenSUSE and gOS, Ubuntu (and its siblings Kubuntu, Edubuntu and Xubuntu) has smoothed most of Linux’s geeky edges while polishing it for the desktop. No question, Gutsy Gibbon is the sleekest, best integrated and most user-friendly Linux distribution yet. It’s now simpler to set up and configure than Windows."
So, I would say the Linux community has plenty to thank Canonical for.
Web developers testing IE on their web sites also need to have Vista or Windows 7 around anyway as IE 7 / IE 8 on Windows XP doesn't have the whole security enhancement of Protected Mode. So if they are only testing on XP they have not fully tested IE.
I think it's safe to say that by far most of the testing done is for layout issues and Javascript functionality. So, not really.
There is precisely ZERO money for the manufacturer and the carrier to produce and qualify new firmware for a phone that already has been 'sold' to an end-user.
Not true. It affects the buyer's next purchase, as well as the perception of the quality of their devices and also the perception of how up to date their devices are for people who are currently shopping. Investing in updated firmware for current devices is a very valid profitable move.
Liberalism and conservatism isn't associated with Democrat and Republican (actual political parties), or with whether or not you might be religious. You can be a conservative atheist Democrat, or a liberal Republican religious nut, or any combination thereof. There are plenty of all types who are misrepresented through politics and stereotypes. Remember: loud idiots who get televised don't represent anybody except themselves.
I also find it hard to believe "1 person in 10 who carry a laptop out of a Big Box Retailer is going to install Linux and leave it on", but that's discounting:
A) repurposed older machines that can't run anything else
B) people who build their own machines
C) people shopping online
I don't buy the 10% figure either for Desktop usage, but I think it's probably higher than the 2% reported (1 out of 50? c'mon...)
I don't think any sane person would expect an IE on Linux or Mac (not since 5.01 anyway); but the XP omission sucks.
Except web developers who need to test on a widely used browser who aren't using Vista or higher. Well, they wouldn't expect it but it certainly would make life easier. The XP omission is double the pain as that's what I'm sure many web developers are running in their VMs in order to IE test their websites. I think it's safe to say they're single-handedly costing the industry billions of dollars in wasted work time because of these omissions (especially XP).
I'm amazed. I just think it's batshit crazy that a power generator or anything like that is hooked up to the Internet in some fashion. It's absolutely insane that these aren't closed systems.
Seconded. Super Mario Kart in single player mode on the hardest difficulty was already next to impossible. I can't imagine playing unfamiliar tracks on top of that crazy shit. Would have cost me more than just 1 busted controller if there was dynamic levels...
Now, I didn't RTFA, but I assume the types of attacks that the NSA director is referring to are more severe than loss of credit card theft and loss of personal data. Things like taking down our air traffic control systems or power grid. For those sorts of systems - yes I think we would want to invest the same level of effort into keeping those systems secure as we do keeping, say, our nuclear reactors secure.
For important infrastructure like the power grid, safety communications like traffic control, and hell in a core like nuclear reactors, I wouldn't think those are hooked up to the 'net anyway.
This isn't Die Hard 4.
Then again.... I could be wrong. It never ceases to amaze me how stupid people are. If those ARE exposed, pull the damn plug.
Slashdot Mirror
You kidding me? There would be mass hysteria among many religious groups!
Precisely. I've seen the same trend in snow blowers. They make the throwers out of plastic now, even the crazy expensive ones, so they pop off constantly. The engines go bad after a few years (seriously, these things are used a very limited number of times a year and they STILL go bad that quickly). Even the fuel lines dissolve quicker.
The one I'm using is nearly 20 years old, and it's built like a rock. It churns through anything and it keeps on chugging along. It requires a few minor repairs every few years, but that's about it.
A crushed pelvis is your kink, eh?
Oh wow. That's such a major change. Beyond that, Wikipedia and a solitary Economist article are not exactly causes for much cheer or evidence that usage has increased to any significant degree.
A less than one percent usage increase that no one can verify and where Mac OS X has probably increased at it and Windows's expense? Wow.
When the increase is 60-something percent, yes, I'd say that's significant. That's like increasing your investment of $10,000 to $16,000. Then your attitude is like turning down that $16,000 because it isn't close to Gates' $billions. What, you think this shit happens overnight?
In other words: you're batshit crazy, and honestly, you're really grasping at straws to cover your ignorant ass here.
Someone mod cain's post up! That's a nice find, thanks!
Haha, oops, caught me. *blushes*
Great websites aren't designed. They are incepted.
The problem is you gotta go 3 levels deep!
Once you turn it off, it stays off. Is that really such a problem that you had to turn it off once per computer?
Because it's once per session, yes, it is indeed a problem.
Exactly. I ABHORE this new feature with a fiery passion. The fact that it's on by default is annoying, and the fact that you actually have to start typing in the search box in order to even turn it off is more annoying... but the fact that once you turn it off, you lose your query and start over from scratch just tops it off. I rage every time.
One of the reasons I used Google over other search engines before was it's simplicity. There was no huge annoying banner ads or other distractions. Now there is.
It may be time to venture out and try some others once again.
Standards are important but without fancy technology buzzwords I don't think the IT department would ever get funding.
You're probably right. The downside is you end up hiring people based on their "qualifications" that consist of listing a buzzword on their resume. Or when some marketing guy gets it stuck in their head and thinks they know how to do your job. Or when your site becomes a mess because someone in management insists that you include all these buzzword "technologies" in order to be on the "cutting edge".
I don't see where you've proved your point. Except for XBMC, which I haven't used, I'd take the Windows product over Linux any day. Apache is especially bad, it's old and tired, just let it die already.
You have any frame of reference for that? How is it "old and tired"? You clearly have no clue what you are talking about. Apache isn't even restricted to Linux. And it doesn't even stop at Apache, as there are at least half a dozen high quality OSS web servers out there that IIS can't possibly compare to.
But back to Apache. Apache is deployed on far more servers as the web server of choice. You can find these statistics anywhere. Not only is it faster, it's far more reliable, especially when deployed in a Linux server.
It doesn't even stop there. In the area of media players, Microsoft can't seem to beat anybody, closed OR open source. Their mobile OS is utterly pathetic, and I think it's safe to say Android is far batter. If desktop eye candy is your thing, OSS wins again (compiz). Hell, even menu and navigation systems win. OS choice on embedded systems? OSS wins. Graphics suite? OSS (Photoshop is NOT Microsoft). The only things Microsoft seems to have going for them is the fact that their Office suite is still unparalleled, and they're so big that they have all the big vendors producing software for them (such as Adobe).
Go home, troll.
Windows servers vs. Linux servers, Apache vs. IIS, XBMC vs. Windows Media Center, etc. Welp, I guess your argument just went straight out the Window!
Based on modern stereotypes and quips made by the two parties, the implication seemed to be made. So, I apologize if there was a misunderstanding.
Still, a false stereotype was made in your post (somehow conservatism = lack of education?), and that was the greater point of my own post.
How and where? Linux desktop usage or applications support has not increased one iota in the last six years, so I'm curious as to where this standard excuse for Ubuntu comes from. The difficulty people have is that Ubuntu's place in the free desktop world simply cannot be measured beyond free CDs and simple marketing blurb.
Where the hell are you getting the idea that usage hasn't increased in the last 6 years?
From this Wikipedia entry:
According to W3Counter webpage hits the Linux desktop market share increased 62% from 1.32% to 2.13% between mid 2007 and the beginning of 2009, while Windows use fell from 95.52% to 88.77% in the same period, a drop of 7%.
And then, under "Reasons for Adoption":
A report in The Economist in December 2007 said: "Linux has swiftly become popular in small businesses and the home. That’s largely the doing of Gutsy Gibbon, the code-name for the Ubuntu 7.10 from Canonical. Along with distributions such as Linspire, Mint, Xandros, OpenSUSE and gOS, Ubuntu (and its siblings Kubuntu, Edubuntu and Xubuntu) has smoothed most of Linux’s geeky edges while polishing it for the desktop. No question, Gutsy Gibbon is the sleekest, best integrated and most user-friendly Linux distribution yet. It’s now simpler to set up and configure than Windows."
So, I would say the Linux community has plenty to thank Canonical for.
If you use contributions to Gnome as a major metric, shouldn't Canonical get some points for indirectly contributing to KDE
All Canonical's done for KDE is give people the impression that it sucks.
Wait a sec, it doesn't suck? I KEED, I KEED!
Web developers testing IE on their web sites also need to have Vista or Windows 7 around anyway as IE 7 / IE 8 on Windows XP doesn't have the whole security enhancement of Protected Mode. So if they are only testing on XP they have not fully tested IE.
I think it's safe to say that by far most of the testing done is for layout issues and Javascript functionality. So, not really.
There is precisely ZERO money for the manufacturer and the carrier to produce and qualify new firmware for a phone that already has been 'sold' to an end-user.
Not true. It affects the buyer's next purchase, as well as the perception of the quality of their devices and also the perception of how up to date their devices are for people who are currently shopping. Investing in updated firmware for current devices is a very valid profitable move.
Liberalism and conservatism isn't associated with Democrat and Republican (actual political parties), or with whether or not you might be religious. You can be a conservative atheist Democrat, or a liberal Republican religious nut, or any combination thereof. There are plenty of all types who are misrepresented through politics and stereotypes. Remember: loud idiots who get televised don't represent anybody except themselves.
I also find it hard to believe "1 person in 10 who carry a laptop out of a Big Box Retailer is going to install Linux and leave it on", but that's discounting:
A) repurposed older machines that can't run anything else
B) people who build their own machines
C) people shopping online
I don't buy the 10% figure either for Desktop usage, but I think it's probably higher than the 2% reported (1 out of 50? c'mon...)
I don't think any sane person would expect an IE on Linux or Mac (not since 5.01 anyway); but the XP omission sucks.
Except web developers who need to test on a widely used browser who aren't using Vista or higher. Well, they wouldn't expect it but it certainly would make life easier. The XP omission is double the pain as that's what I'm sure many web developers are running in their VMs in order to IE test their websites. I think it's safe to say they're single-handedly costing the industry billions of dollars in wasted work time because of these omissions (especially XP).
Amen to your last statement.
I'm amazed. I just think it's batshit crazy that a power generator or anything like that is hooked up to the Internet in some fashion. It's absolutely insane that these aren't closed systems.
And maybe played by the phone itself? I know, it's a craaaazy idea but some people might actually want that...
And some people want to have sex with wallabies.
And now I'll be able to record it in 1080p on my phone!
Seconded. Super Mario Kart in single player mode on the hardest difficulty was already next to impossible. I can't imagine playing unfamiliar tracks on top of that crazy shit. Would have cost me more than just 1 busted controller if there was dynamic levels...
Now, I didn't RTFA, but I assume the types of attacks that the NSA director is referring to are more severe than loss of credit card theft and loss of personal data. Things like taking down our air traffic control systems or power grid. For those sorts of systems - yes I think we would want to invest the same level of effort into keeping those systems secure as we do keeping, say, our nuclear reactors secure.
For important infrastructure like the power grid, safety communications like traffic control, and hell in a core like nuclear reactors, I wouldn't think those are hooked up to the 'net anyway.
This isn't Die Hard 4.
Then again.... I could be wrong. It never ceases to amaze me how stupid people are. If those ARE exposed, pull the damn plug.
OK, so do these speeders get special highways? Because on my morning commute, my problem isn't the speed limit, it's the assholes who are in my way ;)