You may be right. You probably are, that's why I tried to keep my tone subjective: "felt that" != "saw that". Maybe I just wasn't in a good day/week? I don't know exactly, but I think that I saw some manpages that just told me to use info and I didn't like that. But I've never lacked a piece of documentation in my Ubuntu / Gentoo machines. I did, however, feel that FreeBSD didn't give it to me like I wanted (again, I'm not sure if I was just in a bad week...).
I have to say that sound is where Linux is still lacking the most, at least IMHO. However, I have tried a range of distros and I have also tried FreeBSD and OpenBSD. When I ran Linux, I had the feeling that I knew what was happening and that I could fully dominate my hardware. When I used *BSD, I felt that we had a pretty install and a lot of useless crap that doesn't usually come with comparable Linux distros. That's ok, because I can just gradually adapt the OS to suit my needs. But one thing still pissed me off -- Hardware. BSD just didn't cut it hardware wise. With most of the Linux distros that I tried, it was real plug and play. With BSD, I could get *some* (not all) of the hardware to work, by compiling sources downloaded on another PC and moved to that computer. The compilation process always seemed out-of-style in BSD (but that's just me used to the Linux way of doing things), and I felt quite confused with the names and directories where configuration files were stored. I also felt that there was some kind of lack in BSD documentation. Moreover, the last FreeBSD that I tried had a horrible and really slow KDE that just made me want to format the disk and do a loop echoing the words "BSD SUCKS" to the disk over and over again (I actually did something like this;)). From a license point of view, I don't really care about the license of the operating system. I care, however, about the license of libraries, but those are the same in either OS. I, myself, tend to license my work under the GPL (Or LGPL), but I like the BSD way of doing things.
Sound. Well, in FreeBSD it really just worked great. I installed my first Linux 7 years ago. It didn't support my hardware that well (Wireless Adapter...) and the sound was choppy. I was only 10 so it took some time until I tried linux again. My *real* Linux fantasy started 5 years ago, with Ubuntu. I had to take a bazillion of guides, but I got sound to work flawlessly. Then, as time passed, I saw it degrade more and more. It wasn't necessarily the "Pulseaudio season" that ruined it -- in fact, I love Pulseaudio and it's always worked flawlessly for me, except for a slight conflict with Wine... What ruined sound was...well...I don't know. Hardware updates? ALSA changes? Distro crazyness? It all made me get mad at it and so, I've since moved to Gentoo.
Now, with Gentoo, I get portage (best thing EVER). I get to choose everything that goes in or out of my system. I build it from the ground -- no KDE, no GNOME, no XFCE, no nothing. Sound just works[tm], much like it just worked in FreeBSD. I get a blazing fast OS (on the same machine, FreeBSD slowed down to a crawl in some very critical situations). Gentoo doesn't necessarily have to give me more power (I think it does), but it certainly gives me more controlled and organized power with proper documentation.
Also, some people have given very informative answers about how Linux can be considered better sound-wise in some way: it allows for ALSA AND/OR OSS, working no different that in other OSes. It might not come prepared with it out of the box, but it certainly is broader than BSD given these arguments.
Yes, that's not wrong. However, an attempt at supporting one of the largest platforms nowadays wouldn't hurt that much. Yes, I am aware that less than 1% does not mean anything;)
Yes, yes it would. The total marketshare for Linux-based desktops is slightly less than 1% iirc, but what about the marketshare for Linux-based gamers? Probably nowhere near that.
Yes, I agreed that it would;) That's why I said that 1% doesn't mean anything. I really wasn't being ironic! I know how stupid it sounded. Of course I could argue that it doesn't got past 1% because there are no games for it, but I think that'd just be ridiculous -- I really understand it if they don't support Linux, even if I said at some point things that went against what I am saying now.
But this can take on other dimesions besides FOSS. One of the things that really got me pissed off was that Windows 98 "NO MORE SUPPORT" thing. I mean, many people bought legal copies of Windows and of games that Valve, in a search for money (by pleasing newer users), decided to make unusable. Was it old? Yes, it was! But if you buy a game, you expect it to be yours, not semi-owned by a company that shows you the finger. A simpler solution? Maybe just showing up a message such as "Your platform is old. We will not support you anymore and we will not give you recent updates. However, you can still play your current version of game X".
Forcing updates eliminates version fragmentation, which is very important in a service that is purely online. If everybody must update, then everybody has the latest update, then every server and every client is compatible with one another. Valve does not support Windows 98, nor should they. Perhaps they added dependencies upon libraries that were incompatible with Windows 98. Perhaps they just didn't feel like supporting it anymore. If you've ever worked a customer service position (of any sort), you'd know how stupid customers can be and how much of a drain on your resources they can be. Nobody should be trying to run modern games on such an outdated platform anyway... I can't imagine they run very well if at all. (bold added later)
Part of what you say is logical, but the rest doesn't seem to me like it is. When they bought the game, it ran in Windows 98. That's all that matters. As far as the makers are concerned, the customer may have lost all money and be unable to update to a newer platform. Microsoft didn't prevent Windows 98 users from booting up, they just stopped supporting it, and that's the right thing to do (I believe). You argue that it is very important to eliminate version fragmentation and, while I may agree, I can ask: what about offline games which (for sake of a bad system) cannot work even in steam offline mode? This is just ridiculous. I clearly said that the company has ALL RIGHT to say: "We will not support you anymore", because we can't support every platform. However, just forcing users to update a system (paying more money) and change their habits just so that they can continue to play their fully working game is ridiculous. If the game had a bug in W98, then Valve would say: "Screw you, we've told you already, we don't support you" -- and that would be ok! I understand that keeping a compatible server (possibly running at the same time a better one is running) is a waste of money, but then again Valve are still a service provider and they should provide a service to all kinds -- Why do we build buses with ramps if they cost more? Because we have made a commitment to support everyone. It is why in here, in Europe, we pay taxes for a healthcare system that saves millions of people -- we have made a commitment to them. More on this below. Also, I highlighted a sentence of yours that I believe shows something really wrong -- it isn't a matter of running modern games on a new platform, it is a matter of running OLD games on an OLD platform, b
Yes, that's not wrong. However, an attempt at supporting one of the largest platforms nowadays wouldn't hurt that much. Yes, I am aware that less than 1% does not mean anything;)
But this can take on other dimesions besides FOSS. One of the things that really got me pissed off was that Windows 98 "NO MORE SUPPORT" thing. I mean, many people bought legal copies of Windows and of games that Valve, in a search for money (by pleasing newer users), decided to make unusable. Was it old? Yes, it was! But if you buy a game, you expect it to be yours, not semi-owned by a company that shows you the finger. A simpler solution? Maybe just showing up a message such as "Your platform is old. We will not support you anymore and we will not give you recent updates. However, you can still play your current version of game X".
That would have been correct. That would have showed decency. I was not affected by this, but I gradually stopped using Valve products since then (and now I'm free). It was shameful, idiotic and typical of a company that does not care about its users if they don't give money to the company anymore.
I understand that it may cost too much to develop cross-platform tools, but I hate that with each update Steam got less usable in Wine, even though we tried to tell it to the developers: "please, just let us keep this version without updating it". It was plain silly. The same thing happened the other day with Counter Strike Source. An unwanted update changed the whole damn game. Most people whom I know that played it (after they PAYED for it), stopped using Valve too, as they got tired of the constant non requested updates.
I am also aware that, by agreeing with Valve's Terms And Conditions, we, as idiotic users, agreed to be subject to this. This is not a matter of them being allowed to do it, but a matter of them being so inhumane to the point of doing it.
Keep on NOT supporting Linux, I don't care, it still pleases me and helps me do things several orders of magnitude faster than the other people I know. Eventually, smart people will realize what you've done and just stop using your products, even if they stay with Windows, which has its own advantages over UNIX systems. Valve is dead, even if it takes it one hundred years to do so. The only people supporting it in the future (maybe infinity? You tell me...) will certainly be idiots, unless Valve change their policy.
There it goes again. Profitable. Sure profit is extremely important, but it is a real shame that it dictates everything nowadays. It's usually related with "The Amercan Dream". Well, I can do well without that, thanks -- being a Human Being once in a while is ok.
Well, I'd actually be pleased with the "simplest" of versions that just worked. No package system. No fancy gui. No support line whatsoever (after all, I am a "geek", I should know how to fix stuff). However, these companies don't try ANYTHING at all [CITATION NEEDED]. It'd be as simple as (of course, given the money and programming tasks, which I know would be hard) linking up the code to old libraries, containing every possible library that they can and distribute it under a.tar.gz file. There, all distributions supported. If someone doesn't know what to do with it, then screw that someone. All I ask for is an attempt.
"Now if source is not available, then a generic binary package either dinamically linked against old library versions (to ensure compatibility) or a generic binary package (.tar.gz, usually) that contains most of the needed library versions will do."
Agreed. He's an idiot. After all, why not just give your money to Microsoft? After all, they don't care about your happiness if it doesn't persuade you from using their products. Being happy now does not mean everyone's happy (it never will), nor does it mean that you will be happy in the future. I think that if company X makes a lot of decent (non linux-fanatic, like me) people unhappy, then they're not worth following -- it'd be equivalent to watching a war break just in front of you and not making anything to stop it, since it didn't affect you.
And yes, that was meant as criticism to you and myself. As my post has no decent facts to support what I say either. However, quick google will show that indeed they are what they are.They may have been very important in the past -- in the development of what we have today, of our cheap personal computers -- , but now, they're just a bunch of corporate employers employing programmers to dominate the whole industry, no matter what it takes. Now that's not ethic at all, and if I'm paying them to serve me, I'd like to know I'm being served by people with a moral compass.
You are right, now I don't know what to believe. Should I judge someone who was high on criticism to be an idiot because he didn't spell a word correctly, or should I try to take his point of view on some theme? Let's not be fundamentalist. I avoid using Microsoft products, but I don't kill who does (hence I'm part fundamentalist but not extremely fundamentalist to the point of posting something without giving some argumentation that supports what I am saying). Go bash someone else, please. We all know you (and I) want to scew people. After all, why else would we be here talking? Finding a mistake is easy. Not making one is impossible.
Of course they'll have to provide better support: After all, they are choosing to adopt Linux.
Adopting Linux assumes a inherently better change in the way we make software. Even if you don't distribute source code, you need to adapt yourself for more portability, higher past compatibility (which can ultimately lead to efficiency and, sometimes, better code), all things that make software better in one way or another. Sure it has its disadvantages, but I, as a linux user, feel good about having the power to control my OS and my computer (come on Windows users, there's no power like UNIX power, no matter how much shit you get in(out of?) your pc), so I accept disadvantages in exchange for the true power that computing should be about for us programmers.
It shouldn't cost that much to port applications to Linux after it's reached Mac. I would even be satisfied with a console version of steam (it's UNIXified already people!).
Of course I say that it wouldn't cost that much, but it would, money-wise. That's whats wrong with our overcapitalist shitty ass of a fucking system. They want money. That's all. They don't care about our happiness unless it changes their profit. We need to change this system and to decentralize the power from Valve, Microsoft, Apple, Google, etc, so that we do not rely on them. We can do that by not using their software (that is what I do; yes, I'm sure they're pissed at a -1 in their 10 orders of magnitude statistics) or by making laws that force them to take a fair approach. However, defining "fair approach" is next to impossible as it allows for all kinds of trapdows (next we'll have BSD users requesting steam, then OS2, then iOS!; besides, just choosing "market usage" is silly and is not based on any real deductive principle).
Stop giving money to these pigs. Today they might make you happy, but there's a hell lot of people who are just like you or even better (or worse!) that are not happy. Who knows, maybe tomorrow they'll piss you off too?
It wouldn't make it easier! It is true that Ubuntu is, nowadays, a very important distribution in the Linux World. However, we shouldn't standardize on deb or rpm. Source-code is, as always (the True and Only Way) the best possible choice of distribution. Now if source is not available, then a generic binary package either dinamically linked against old library versions (to ensure compatibility) or a generic binary package (.tar.gz, usually) that contains most of the needed library versions will do.
But really, the One Way To Be Right way is to just give the source-code out. Too bad they don't do it, but I understand their POV...
Then you are a poor soul. Lower my Karma, but I am never touching Windows again, unless I'm forced to do so in my job. It disgusts me to support and see other people support the tirany of Microsoft.
Back in the day when I was 11 and used Windows, that's what I used to do. I just didn't call it "shit", I called "Old Desktop Stuff". I ended up wasting 5 DVDs to save all those folders when I migrated to another machine.
Expect better? Better for what? Creationism should be challenged! It has a very high chance of being wrong and it is completely unnatural. Faith is one thing, insanity is another.
Exactly, Creationism has a very very very high chance of being wrong, and I usually say that only idiots view creationism as true -- come on, just because you have faith it doesn't mean that you have to believe in nonsense. Faith is one thing, crazy fundamentalist crap is another. Creationism will never be a science, and if I could, without incurring in a fallacy, I'd say "it is just plain stupid and definitely wrong". I am a non-believer, an atheist, but I respect other people's faith, as I know that it is a fallacy to either say that god exists or that god doesn't. This, however, doesn't mean that I have to turn into a baboon and agree with those who believe in creationism. It's just absurd!
With that said, I think that the commentary is, indeed, spot on.
Microsoft Fanboy: "Lies,/. is for Lusers, I am only here because I must show u th4t."
Anti-Microsoft: "YAY!"
Balanced people: "So....why should I care? Oh yeah, Microsoft's evil."
I tend to disagree. Have you looked at the numbers? There are around 30-50 comments (sometimes they reach 150), when they usually peaked at 200 or more. Might be a work day or just stupid news, but it sounds to me like people have left. I, for one, cannot get myself organized in this whitespace madness (and BIG GUIness).
[Offtopic] Is it just me, or the new Slashdot design seems to have chased away most of the people out there? Most stories are very short on comments! Come on people, get back to trolling and bashing stuff!!
Yes, I stand corrected, sorry, I read a decent article that pointed it out. In fact, I read the article you pointed me to, even though I only just clicked it.
Slashdot Mirror
You may be right. You probably are, that's why I tried to keep my tone subjective: "felt that" != "saw that". Maybe I just wasn't in a good day/week? I don't know exactly, but I think that I saw some manpages that just told me to use info and I didn't like that. But I've never lacked a piece of documentation in my Ubuntu / Gentoo machines. I did, however, feel that FreeBSD didn't give it to me like I wanted (again, I'm not sure if I was just in a bad week...).
I have to say that sound is where Linux is still lacking the most, at least IMHO. ;)).
However, I have tried a range of distros and I have also tried FreeBSD and OpenBSD. When I ran Linux, I had the feeling that I knew what was happening and that I could fully dominate my hardware. When I used *BSD, I felt that we had a pretty install and a lot of useless crap that doesn't usually come with comparable Linux distros. That's ok, because I can just gradually adapt the OS to suit my needs. But one thing still pissed me off -- Hardware. BSD just didn't cut it hardware wise. With most of the Linux distros that I tried, it was real plug and play. With BSD, I could get *some* (not all) of the hardware to work, by compiling sources downloaded on another PC and moved to that computer. The compilation process always seemed out-of-style in BSD (but that's just me used to the Linux way of doing things), and I felt quite confused with the names and directories where configuration files were stored. I also felt that there was some kind of lack in BSD documentation. Moreover, the last FreeBSD that I tried had a horrible and really slow KDE that just made me want to format the disk and do a loop echoing the words "BSD SUCKS" to the disk over and over again (I actually did something like this
From a license point of view, I don't really care about the license of the operating system. I care, however, about the license of libraries, but those are the same in either OS. I, myself, tend to license my work under the GPL (Or LGPL), but I like the BSD way of doing things.
Sound. Well, in FreeBSD it really just worked great.
I installed my first Linux 7 years ago. It didn't support my hardware that well (Wireless Adapter...) and the sound was choppy. I was only 10 so it took some time until I tried linux again. My *real* Linux fantasy started 5 years ago, with Ubuntu. I had to take a bazillion of guides, but I got sound to work flawlessly. Then, as time passed, I saw it degrade more and more. It wasn't necessarily the "Pulseaudio season" that ruined it -- in fact, I love Pulseaudio and it's always worked flawlessly for me, except for a slight conflict with Wine... What ruined sound was...well...I don't know. Hardware updates? ALSA changes? Distro crazyness? It all made me get mad at it and so, I've since moved to Gentoo.
Now, with Gentoo, I get portage (best thing EVER). I get to choose everything that goes in or out of my system. I build it from the ground -- no KDE, no GNOME, no XFCE, no nothing. Sound just works[tm], much like it just worked in FreeBSD. I get a blazing fast OS (on the same machine, FreeBSD slowed down to a crawl in some very critical situations). Gentoo doesn't necessarily have to give me more power (I think it does), but it certainly gives me more controlled and organized power with proper documentation.
Also, some people have given very informative answers about how Linux can be considered better sound-wise in some way: it allows for ALSA AND/OR OSS, working no different that in other OSes. It might not come prepared with it out of the box, but it certainly is broader than BSD given these arguments.
Given that they must have a very low IQ to do this, I suppose they'll be like: "I can haz your work and call it mine?"
I've rediscovered the World as Gentoo Linux.
Yes, that's not wrong. However, an attempt at supporting one of the largest platforms nowadays wouldn't hurt that much. Yes, I am aware that less than 1% does not mean anything ;)
Yes, yes it would. The total marketshare for Linux-based desktops is slightly less than 1% iirc, but what about the marketshare for Linux-based gamers? Probably nowhere near that.
Yes, I agreed that it would ;) That's why I said that 1% doesn't mean anything. I really wasn't being ironic! I know how stupid it sounded. Of course I could argue that it doesn't got past 1% because there are no games for it, but I think that'd just be ridiculous -- I really understand it if they don't support Linux, even if I said at some point things that went against what I am saying now.
But this can take on other dimesions besides FOSS. One of the things that really got me pissed off was that Windows 98 "NO MORE SUPPORT" thing. I mean, many people bought legal copies of Windows and of games that Valve, in a search for money (by pleasing newer users), decided to make unusable. Was it old? Yes, it was! But if you buy a game, you expect it to be yours, not semi-owned by a company that shows you the finger. A simpler solution? Maybe just showing up a message such as "Your platform is old. We will not support you anymore and we will not give you recent updates. However, you can still play your current version of game X".
Forcing updates eliminates version fragmentation, which is very important in a service that is purely online. If everybody must update, then everybody has the latest update, then every server and every client is compatible with one another. Valve does not support Windows 98, nor should they. Perhaps they added dependencies upon libraries that were incompatible with Windows 98. Perhaps they just didn't feel like supporting it anymore. If you've ever worked a customer service position (of any sort), you'd know how stupid customers can be and how much of a drain on your resources they can be. Nobody should be trying to run modern games on such an outdated platform anyway... I can't imagine they run very well if at all. (bold added later)
Part of what you say is logical, but the rest doesn't seem to me like it is. When they bought the game, it ran in Windows 98. That's all that matters. As far as the makers are concerned, the customer may have lost all money and be unable to update to a newer platform. Microsoft didn't prevent Windows 98 users from booting up, they just stopped supporting it, and that's the right thing to do (I believe). You argue that it is very important to eliminate version fragmentation and, while I may agree, I can ask: what about offline games which (for sake of a bad system) cannot work even in steam offline mode? This is just ridiculous. I clearly said that the company has ALL RIGHT to say: "We will not support you anymore", because we can't support every platform. However, just forcing users to update a system (paying more money) and change their habits just so that they can continue to play their fully working game is ridiculous. If the game had a bug in W98, then Valve would say: "Screw you, we've told you already, we don't support you" -- and that would be ok! I understand that keeping a compatible server (possibly running at the same time a better one is running) is a waste of money, but then again Valve are still a service provider and they should provide a service to all kinds -- Why do we build buses with ramps if they cost more? Because we have made a commitment to support everyone. It is why in here, in Europe, we pay taxes for a healthcare system that saves millions of people -- we have made a commitment to them. More on this below. Also, I highlighted a sentence of yours that I believe shows something really wrong -- it isn't a matter of running modern games on a new platform, it is a matter of running OLD games on an OLD platform, b
Yes, that's not wrong. However, an attempt at supporting one of the largest platforms nowadays wouldn't hurt that much. Yes, I am aware that less than 1% does not mean anything ;)
But this can take on other dimesions besides FOSS. One of the things that really got me pissed off was that Windows 98 "NO MORE SUPPORT" thing. I mean, many people bought legal copies of Windows and of games that Valve, in a search for money (by pleasing newer users), decided to make unusable. Was it old? Yes, it was! But if you buy a game, you expect it to be yours, not semi-owned by a company that shows you the finger. A simpler solution? Maybe just showing up a message such as "Your platform is old. We will not support you anymore and we will not give you recent updates. However, you can still play your current version of game X".
That would have been correct. That would have showed decency. I was not affected by this, but I gradually stopped using Valve products since then (and now I'm free). It was shameful, idiotic and typical of a company that does not care about its users if they don't give money to the company anymore.
I understand that it may cost too much to develop cross-platform tools, but I hate that with each update Steam got less usable in Wine, even though we tried to tell it to the developers: "please, just let us keep this version without updating it". It was plain silly. The same thing happened the other day with Counter Strike Source. An unwanted update changed the whole damn game. Most people whom I know that played it (after they PAYED for it), stopped using Valve too, as they got tired of the constant non requested updates.
I am also aware that, by agreeing with Valve's Terms And Conditions, we, as idiotic users, agreed to be subject to this. This is not a matter of them being allowed to do it, but a matter of them being so inhumane to the point of doing it.
Keep on NOT supporting Linux, I don't care, it still pleases me and helps me do things several orders of magnitude faster than the other people I know. Eventually, smart people will realize what you've done and just stop using your products, even if they stay with Windows, which has its own advantages over UNIX systems. Valve is dead, even if it takes it one hundred years to do so. The only people supporting it in the future (maybe infinity? You tell me...) will certainly be idiots, unless Valve change their policy.
There it goes again. Profitable. Sure profit is extremely important, but it is a real shame that it dictates everything nowadays. It's usually related with "The Amercan Dream". Well, I can do well without that, thanks -- being a Human Being once in a while is ok.
Well, I'd actually be pleased with the "simplest" of versions that just worked. No package system. No fancy gui. No support line whatsoever (after all, I am a "geek", I should know how to fix stuff). However, these companies don't try ANYTHING at all [CITATION NEEDED]. It'd be as simple as (of course, given the money and programming tasks, which I know would be hard) linking up the code to old libraries, containing every possible library that they can and distribute it under a .tar.gz file. There, all distributions supported. If someone doesn't know what to do with it, then screw that someone. All I ask for is an attempt.
Sure :)
"Now if source is not available, then a generic binary package either dinamically linked against old library versions (to ensure compatibility) or a generic binary package (.tar.gz, usually) that contains most of the needed library versions will do."
What do you think that I meant with that?
Agreed. He's an idiot. After all, why not just give your money to Microsoft? After all, they don't care about your happiness if it doesn't persuade you from using their products. Being happy now does not mean everyone's happy (it never will), nor does it mean that you will be happy in the future. I think that if company X makes a lot of decent (non linux-fanatic, like me) people unhappy, then they're not worth following -- it'd be equivalent to watching a war break just in front of you and not making anything to stop it, since it didn't affect you.
And yes, that was meant as criticism to you and myself. As my post has no decent facts to support what I say either. However, quick google will show that indeed they are what they are.They may have been very important in the past -- in the development of what we have today, of our cheap personal computers -- , but now, they're just a bunch of corporate employers employing programmers to dominate the whole industry, no matter what it takes. Now that's not ethic at all, and if I'm paying them to serve me, I'd like to know I'm being served by people with a moral compass.
You are right, now I don't know what to believe. Should I judge someone who was high on criticism to be an idiot because he didn't spell a word correctly, or should I try to take his point of view on some theme? Let's not be fundamentalist. I avoid using Microsoft products, but I don't kill who does (hence I'm part fundamentalist but not extremely fundamentalist to the point of posting something without giving some argumentation that supports what I am saying). Go bash someone else, please. We all know you (and I) want to scew people. After all, why else would we be here talking?
Finding a mistake is easy. Not making one is impossible.
Stop Giving Power To These Idiots: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1999586&cid=35231854
Of course they'll have to provide better support: After all, they are choosing to adopt Linux.
Adopting Linux assumes a inherently better change in the way we make software. Even if you don't distribute source code, you need to adapt yourself for more portability, higher past compatibility (which can ultimately lead to efficiency and, sometimes, better code), all things that make software better in one way or another. Sure it has its disadvantages, but I, as a linux user, feel good about having the power to control my OS and my computer (come on Windows users, there's no power like UNIX power, no matter how much shit you get in(out of?) your pc), so I accept disadvantages in exchange for the true power that computing should be about for us programmers.
It shouldn't cost that much to port applications to Linux after it's reached Mac. I would even be satisfied with a console version of steam (it's UNIXified already people!).
Of course I say that it wouldn't cost that much, but it would, money-wise. That's whats wrong with our overcapitalist shitty ass of a fucking system. They want money. That's all. They don't care about our happiness unless it changes their profit. We need to change this system and to decentralize the power from Valve, Microsoft, Apple, Google, etc, so that we do not rely on them. We can do that by not using their software (that is what I do; yes, I'm sure they're pissed at a -1 in their 10 orders of magnitude statistics) or by making laws that force them to take a fair approach. However, defining "fair approach" is next to impossible as it allows for all kinds of trapdows (next we'll have BSD users requesting steam, then OS2, then iOS!; besides, just choosing "market usage" is silly and is not based on any real deductive principle).
Stop giving money to these pigs. Today they might make you happy, but there's a hell lot of people who are just like you or even better (or worse!) that are not happy. Who knows, maybe tomorrow they'll piss you off too?
It wouldn't make it easier! It is true that Ubuntu is, nowadays, a very important distribution in the Linux World. However, we shouldn't standardize on deb or rpm. Source-code is, as always (the True and Only Way) the best possible choice of distribution. Now if source is not available, then a generic binary package either dinamically linked against old library versions (to ensure compatibility) or a generic binary package (.tar.gz, usually) that contains most of the needed library versions will do.
But really, the One Way To Be Right way is to just give the source-code out. Too bad they don't do it, but I understand their POV...
Then you are a poor soul. Lower my Karma, but I am never touching Windows again, unless I'm forced to do so in my job. It disgusts me to support and see other people support the tirany of Microsoft.
Back in the day when I was 11 and used Windows, that's what I used to do. I just didn't call it "shit", I called "Old Desktop Stuff". I ended up wasting 5 DVDs to save all those folders when I migrated to another machine.
Exactly, that's my proof.
Expect better? Better for what? Creationism should be challenged! It has a very high chance of being wrong and it is completely unnatural. Faith is one thing, insanity is another.
Exactly, Creationism has a very very very high chance of being wrong, and I usually say that only idiots view creationism as true -- come on, just because you have faith it doesn't mean that you have to believe in nonsense. Faith is one thing, crazy fundamentalist crap is another. Creationism will never be a science, and if I could, without incurring in a fallacy, I'd say "it is just plain stupid and definitely wrong". I am a non-believer, an atheist, but I respect other people's faith, as I know that it is a fallacy to either say that god exists or that god doesn't. This, however, doesn't mean that I have to turn into a baboon and agree with those who believe in creationism. It's just absurd!
With that said, I think that the commentary is, indeed, spot on.
Microsoft Fanboy: "Lies, /. is for Lusers, I am only here because I must show u th4t."
Anti-Microsoft: "YAY!"
Balanced people: "So....why should I care? Oh yeah, Microsoft's evil."
But I'd just stick with "YAY!"
I tend to disagree. Have you looked at the numbers? There are around 30-50 comments (sometimes they reach 150), when they usually peaked at 200 or more. Might be a work day or just stupid news, but it sounds to me like people have left. I, for one, cannot get myself organized in this whitespace madness (and BIG GUIness).
[Offtopic] Is it just me, or the new Slashdot design seems to have chased away most of the people out there? Most stories are very short on comments! Come on people, get back to trolling and bashing stuff!!
Yes, I stand corrected, sorry, I read a decent article that pointed it out. In fact, I read the article you pointed me to, even though I only just clicked it.
Always good to know you can still make mistakes.