I agree. I'd consider that part of point (1) -- doing more than just the basics and (2) -- because they were Gnome only they were able to make Gnome work great. But we agree.
As for Gnome 2 -> Gnome 3... I see both sides of it. I do think Gnome group is keeping with their mission. In some ways I think its time for all the Ubuntu users who started 2005-2008 to move onto another harder / more advanced distribution. They shouldn't be on a beginner distribution anymore. They should be on Fedora, Debian, Sayabon, Suse, Arch, maybe Mandriva... I think they are ready to step up. And I feel the same way with Gnome. Gnome is intended for ease of use, if you care about your GUI and want a full featured GUI IMHO you should be on KDE.
Me personally, I'm pretty easy when it comes to Linux. I'm old fashioned and frankly I like WindowMaker i.e. no GUI just window management with virtual desktops. I've used LXDE with Knoppix and like it quite a bit. I was perfectly happy with Gnome2, but not in love in seemed feature poor to me. But I have tried unified notification on iOS and I think that is a major upgrade for desktops. So I agree with what Gnome is attempting. And I agree with the people who switched in 2005-8 being upset at a downgrade, it is for them a downgrade. So take advantage of Linuxes wonderful diversity. Build the GUI you want.
That sounds perfect. Locally your version and globally checked. OK I think this is worth a shot. Next time I blow away/opt/local (which should be within the next 6 months) I'll try Homebrew before just reinstalling darwin ports. I'd love to go back to up to date and well maintained.
And end users are submitting in large numbers? I could see how that could lead to a massive supply of packages. The thing with ports and fink is that there is a learning curve on how to configure a port.
If random people are inserting code, how do you avoid viruses, what about conflicts / merge complexity...?
There are any number of distributions which used to charge about $30-100/yr. Most of them were financial failures. The fact is in large numbers Linux end users did mind paying for the OS at least on a regular or consistent basis. But feel free to support http://www.mandriva.com/en/ which is doing what you are asking for 14 years.
Actually I think you are better off with a distribution whose GUI is users. Agnostic distros tend not to take advantage fo the features of any of the 4 GUIs very much. The best solution is a distribution in line with your choice.
Yeah guess Linux will have to settle for 2/3rds of the server market, 95% super computing, the most popular mainframe framework outside of native, arguably the most popular cell phone environment. But hey, they didn't beat companies with hundreds of billions in market cap each at desktop.
1) It had a well maintained package system of configured packages. There was a time where most distributions configured the base stuff but other applications weren't fully configured.
2) At a time when all the competitors felt the need to be Gnome and KDE and traditional window managers, Ubuntu was able to be Gnome only and configure for Gnome giving a unified feel. The choice of Gnome was also good. Gnome had started to do very well around 2002 and KDE floundered, especially with respect to United Linux. Ubuntu along with distributions like Progeny and UserLinux came along at a time when the Unix community was ready to standardize on Gnome while early distributions had user bases that were much more divided.
3) Most distributions were trying to make money on their desktop versions and were discouraging free distribution. Ubuntu has never tried to make money off the distribution which led to two major advantages: a) Ubuntu would mail CDs with the distribution, which was useful for for install fests. b) But beyond that, you could access their repositories for nothing.
4) Ubuntu choose to build off Debian testing which is very high quality and reasonably up to date. Most other major repositories have failed in one or the other area.
5) Ubuntu focused immediately on hardware lists. Simple easy instruction to resolve problems on hardware, rather than opaque instructions. The Ubuntu forums were a huge step forward in Linux to the masses.
6) Ubuntu embraced the open source ideology with things like the circle of friends logo. Many of the early Linux companies were more focused on business acceptance at the time.
7) Many of the other distributions in the easy desktop space were going bankrupt. Ubuntu had deeper pockets.
______
So why is Ubuntu more popular than Fedora?
a) Easier to install b) Far fewer bugs c) General direction dictated by Debian and the distribution itself rather than by the needs of an Enterprise server distribution. d) A novice friendly community.
When I last looked at homebrew it didn't have the package diversity of fink or macports (darwinports at the time). I'd love to have a macports vs. fink vs. homebrew thread on/. and hear plusses and minus. I think I tried to start one a few years back. Now that apple threads get tons of hits might be worth another shot.
1) Darwin is a BSD and Macports is a pretty good ports system. So IMHO the Unix functionality is only slightly worse than Linux, though configuration can be much worse on OSX. 2) The desktop productivity software for Mac is IMHO better than Windows, far better than Linux and almost infinitely better than a BSD or Solaris. You do still loose some choice of apps but not much. 3) The fully integrated experience reduces administration and configuration time well below either Windows or Linux.
The availability of Unix software on Linux is fantastic. But frankly applications are so complex to configure and quite often poorly documented it is a considerable amount of time. Which means that a basic desktop is often instant, but the real value add for Linux is the advanced apps and there the edges are still quite rough.
I really like visio as well. But on Mac I use graffle, and also about a decade I used concept draw which at the time was more full featured than Visio (!). If you are a Mac guy might be worth taking a look.
Your reasons make sense in terms of Linux. If you don't want to tinker and don't need customization... What made you switch from Mac to Linux in '08 and how come you went Linux -> Windows rather than Linux -> Mac?
I'm not sure what technology you see Apple disrupting. I can make a case on some of their specifics but I'd like you to present what technologies you see being disrupted. And finally I don't see the connection with your last line, nor do I even understand what it means.
Actually we know consumers are extremely price sensitive in the integrated mobile market. That's the reason carriers subsidize phones. Without subsidy consumers would buy low quality phones, their mobile experience is poor and hence their usage drops off sharply. Consumers seem willing to pay much more with a device much better than the one they are willing to buy.
When we have seen tablets go head to head. Consumers do seem aware of margin. The tablet market hasn't made heavy use of subsidy. But the point of the article is that consumers consider the price ridiculously high and when faced with a substantially worse product at a lower price point.
I've heard that too with IHS saying they are -$10/per. But Amazon insists they are profitable in official filings with fire.
Anyway, the margin on kindle content is nowhere near 50%. I don't think they have any items with a 100% markup at all. I'd guess closer to 20%. But... I disagree with you on $40 content. Amazon does more ebook volume than physical book volume. Kindle readers seem to get some new content about every 3 weeks per. The question with fire since fire isn't exclusively an e-reader do they start picking up people that are not heavy book readers.
I'm talking gross margin on hardware. I had originally heard that Amazon was taking a small loss but they announced to shareholders they weren't and since lying to shareholders about a matter of simple fact is criminal, I believe them.
Apple doesn't get into prince wars. They give away market share against competitors that are willing to lose money and focus on profitable segments of the market.
The Kindle Fire is $200 the iPad starts at $500 and goes up to $830. They are competing at different levels of the market. And Apple's hardware margin is about 50% while Amazon's is around 10%. Which means people are getting a better hardware value.
Why would it be a shock if given those sorts of numbers the iPad was outsold?
They are known for oppressing their own citizens. I can't think of any incidents of China engaging in activities against foreign newspapers, television stations, writers.... Conversely the US does foreign operations but domestically is extremely free.
BB is a terrific texting and email phone. Far and away the best texting and email experience even compared to texting phones.
I can type pretty fast on my iPhone using a the smart keyboard (an app). I touch type on a normal sized keyboard so eyes closed wouldn't matter on a regular keyboard, I never got that good with the phone but I easily could have.
Anyway if you care about typing why move away from a physical keyboard?
I understand it is not a democracy. However committing a copyright violation requires that the minority prove by preponderance of the evidence that a violation occurred. Large numbers of people with a well over majority stake in the work saying there is no violation is likely to make that impossible.
It wouldn't matter. Far too many people with standing have argued that there is no violation. Even if there would otherwise be a violation, that kills the violation.
If I say that you aren't violating my property rights be being on the back 1/3rd of my backyard, even though legal reasoning is nonsense that kills the trespassing charge.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. I'd consider that part of point (1) -- doing more than just the basics and (2) -- because they were Gnome only they were able to make Gnome work great. But we agree.
As for Gnome 2 -> Gnome 3... I see both sides of it. I do think Gnome group is keeping with their mission. In some ways I think its time for all the Ubuntu users who started 2005-2008 to move onto another harder / more advanced distribution. They shouldn't be on a beginner distribution anymore. They should be on Fedora, Debian, Sayabon, Suse, Arch, maybe Mandriva... I think they are ready to step up. And I feel the same way with Gnome. Gnome is intended for ease of use, if you care about your GUI and want a full featured GUI IMHO you should be on KDE.
Me personally, I'm pretty easy when it comes to Linux. I'm old fashioned and frankly I like WindowMaker i.e. no GUI just window management with virtual desktops. I've used LXDE with Knoppix and like it quite a bit. I was perfectly happy with Gnome2, but not in love in seemed feature poor to me. But I have tried unified notification on iOS and I think that is a major upgrade for desktops. So I agree with what Gnome is attempting. And I agree with the people who switched in 2005-8 being upset at a downgrade, it is for them a downgrade. So take advantage of Linuxes wonderful diversity. Build the GUI you want.
That sounds perfect. Locally your version and globally checked. OK I think this is worth a shot. Next time I blow away /opt/local (which should be within the next 6 months) I'll try Homebrew before just reinstalling darwin ports. I'd love to go back to up to date and well maintained.
And end users are submitting in large numbers? I could see how that could lead to a massive supply of packages. The thing with ports and fink is that there is a learning curve on how to configure a port.
If random people are inserting code, how do you avoid viruses, what about conflicts / merge complexity...?
There are any number of distributions which used to charge about $30-100/yr. Most of them were financial failures. The fact is in large numbers Linux end users did mind paying for the OS at least on a regular or consistent basis. But feel free to support http://www.mandriva.com/en/ which is doing what you are asking for 14 years.
Actually I think you are better off with a distribution whose GUI is users. Agnostic distros tend not to take advantage fo the features of any of the 4 GUIs very much. The best solution is a distribution in line with your choice.
Yeah guess Linux will have to settle for 2/3rds of the server market, 95% super computing, the most popular mainframe framework outside of native, arguably the most popular cell phone environment. But hey, they didn't beat companies with hundreds of billions in market cap each at desktop.
Ubuntu became popular for several reasons:
1) It had a well maintained package system of configured packages. There was a time where most distributions configured the base stuff but other applications weren't fully configured.
2) At a time when all the competitors felt the need to be Gnome and KDE and traditional window managers, Ubuntu was able to be Gnome only and configure for Gnome giving a unified feel. The choice of Gnome was also good. Gnome had started to do very well around 2002 and KDE floundered, especially with respect to United Linux. Ubuntu along with distributions like Progeny and UserLinux came along at a time when the Unix community was ready to standardize on Gnome while early distributions had user bases that were much more divided.
3) Most distributions were trying to make money on their desktop versions and were discouraging free distribution. Ubuntu has never tried to make money off the distribution which led to two major advantages:
a) Ubuntu would mail CDs with the distribution, which was useful for for install fests.
b) But beyond that, you could access their repositories for nothing.
4) Ubuntu choose to build off Debian testing which is very high quality and reasonably up to date. Most other major repositories have failed in one or the other area.
5) Ubuntu focused immediately on hardware lists. Simple easy instruction to resolve problems on hardware, rather than opaque instructions. The Ubuntu forums were a huge step forward in Linux to the masses.
6) Ubuntu embraced the open source ideology with things like the circle of friends logo. Many of the early Linux companies were more focused on business acceptance at the time.
7) Many of the other distributions in the easy desktop space were going bankrupt. Ubuntu had deeper pockets.
______
a) Easier to install
b) Far fewer bugs
c) General direction dictated by Debian and the distribution itself rather than by the needs of an Enterprise server distribution.
d) A novice friendly community.
When I last looked at homebrew it didn't have the package diversity of fink or macports (darwinports at the time). I'd love to have a macports vs. fink vs. homebrew thread on /. and hear plusses and minus. I think I tried to start one a few years back. Now that apple threads get tons of hits might be worth another shot.
That shouldn't be a problem, Concept draw and Graffle import and export .vsd.
Why OSX for a desktop Unix?
1) Darwin is a BSD and Macports is a pretty good ports system. So IMHO the Unix functionality is only slightly worse than Linux, though configuration can be much worse on OSX.
2) The desktop productivity software for Mac is IMHO better than Windows, far better than Linux and almost infinitely better than a BSD or Solaris. You do still loose some choice of apps but not much.
3) The fully integrated experience reduces administration and configuration time well below either Windows or Linux.
The availability of Unix software on Linux is fantastic. But frankly applications are so complex to configure and quite often poorly documented it is a considerable amount of time. Which means that a basic desktop is often instant, but the real value add for Linux is the advanced apps and there the edges are still quite rough.
I really like visio as well. But on Mac I use graffle, and also about a decade I used concept draw which at the time was more full featured than Visio (!). If you are a Mac guy might be worth taking a look.
Your reasons make sense in terms of Linux. If you don't want to tinker and don't need customization... What made you switch from Mac to Linux in '08 and how come you went Linux -> Windows rather than Linux -> Mac?
There is a SecureCRT for Mac and Linux as well. Secure is cross platform.
I've read them.
I'm not sure what technology you see Apple disrupting. I can make a case on some of their specifics but I'd like you to present what technologies you see being disrupted. And finally I don't see the connection with your last line, nor do I even understand what it means.
Actually we know consumers are extremely price sensitive in the integrated mobile market. That's the reason carriers subsidize phones. Without subsidy consumers would buy low quality phones, their mobile experience is poor and hence their usage drops off sharply. Consumers seem willing to pay much more with a device much better than the one they are willing to buy.
When we have seen tablets go head to head. Consumers do seem aware of margin. The tablet market hasn't made heavy use of subsidy. But the point of the article is that consumers consider the price ridiculously high and when faced with a substantially worse product at a lower price point.
I've heard that too with IHS saying they are -$10 /per. But Amazon insists they are profitable in official filings with fire.
Anyway, the margin on kindle content is nowhere near 50%. I don't think they have any items with a 100% markup at all. I'd guess closer to 20%. But... I disagree with you on $40 content. Amazon does more ebook volume than physical book volume. Kindle readers seem to get some new content about every 3 weeks per. The question with fire since fire isn't exclusively an e-reader do they start picking up people that are not heavy book readers.
You are confusing "margin", its the other way its about $180 worth of parts.
I'm talking gross margin on hardware. I had originally heard that Amazon was taking a small loss but they announced to shareholders they weren't and since lying to shareholders about a matter of simple fact is criminal, I believe them.
Apple doesn't get into prince wars. They give away market share against competitors that are willing to lose money and focus on profitable segments of the market.
The Kindle Fire is $200 the iPad starts at $500 and goes up to $830. They are competing at different levels of the market. And Apple's hardware margin is about 50% while Amazon's is around 10%. Which means people are getting a better hardware value.
Why would it be a shock if given those sorts of numbers the iPad was outsold?
They are known for oppressing their own citizens. I can't think of any incidents of China engaging in activities against foreign newspapers, television stations, writers.... Conversely the US does foreign operations but domestically is extremely free.
BB is a terrific texting and email phone. Far and away the best texting and email experience even compared to texting phones.
I can type pretty fast on my iPhone using a the smart keyboard (an app). I touch type on a normal sized keyboard so eyes closed wouldn't matter on a regular keyboard, I never got that good with the phone but I easily could have.
Anyway if you care about typing why move away from a physical keyboard?
I understand it is not a democracy. However committing a copyright violation requires that the minority prove by preponderance of the evidence that a violation occurred. Large numbers of people with a well over majority stake in the work saying there is no violation is likely to make that impossible.
It wouldn't matter. Far too many people with standing have argued that there is no violation. Even if there would otherwise be a violation, that kills the violation.
If I say that you aren't violating my property rights be being on the back 1/3rd of my backyard, even though legal reasoning is nonsense that kills the trespassing charge.
OK what lines of the header files do you claim copyright to?