Okay. Send me a copy of the file/etc/X11/XF86Config-4. My email address is my initials (at the foot of the message) followed by the "at" sign followed by my initials again followed by.cx.
If you don't have an/etc/X11/XF86Config-4 then send/etc/X11/XF86Config.
please show me the $500 intel-based laptop that compares to a ToBook...
I was making a more general point about Apple hardware than just laptops but, in fact, the price difference is even worse in the laptop market than the desktop. Some of that is made up for in quality but not enough.
And anyone from Apple that can get me a good price on super TiBooks? *grin*
The truth is that unless someone gets me a "good price" on the hardware there's no chance that I'll get OSX. The interface is quite nice, although that's not enough on its own, and the hardware is great but then a 1930's Bentley is a really nice car but I ain't got the cash.
How much Intel can 500 quid buy? What fraction of an Apple would the same money buy?
Operating System has many vague definitions, but "kernel" isn't one of them.
A program which controls access to the hardware while providing an API for other programs to request access that hardware is an OS for the hardware it has control over. The Linux Kernel generally has control over all the hardware on your machine, therefor it's the OS for your machine.
There are other definitions but I find this one the most realistic and least prone to endless debates about where the OS ends and applications start.
For god's sake, who thinks these are frequently asked questions.
Linux is the OS and the user may or may not run GNU software on it. With KDE and OpenOffice there are many users who never see a GNU program from one day to the next. Redefining the term "Operating System" to include the programs RMS likes to use is not a valid argument.
I wish RMS would just piss off now, he's become counter-productive to the whole free-software movement and seems to exist solely for the purpose of making it look bad.
TWW
Re:as long as I have the option of not installing
on
More on KDE Groupware
·
· Score: 2
That's the beauty of KDE and GNome. They are totally configuarble.
Even better than that: you don't need to use them at all! WindowMaker keeps me happy.
I think that your father-in-law is slightly unusual. None of the Windows users I've known in the last nearly 10 years has ever bought an upgrade, they just get a new machine or make do with the version they had. And, of course, the new machines had new versions "free" with them. You are right about Dell and Gateway but their problem is not price, it's MS's muscle that stops them selling Linux machines.
If you want a single machine to play the most games on it's still the PC.
But how many of the consoles could you buy for the price of that gamer's PC? Pretty well all of them and you would have the assurance that you'll be playing games without upgrades for at least three years after a console's launch and probably five.
It doesn't make economic sense to only play games on a PC. It hardly even makes economic sense to keep your work PC at a standard where you can keep playing current games on it.
Old monkey-man is the best hope OS/Linux/Freedom has, frankly. Imagine if they fired him and got in someone with a brain.
I remember seeing a chimp with Down's Syndrome: it walked fully upright like a human. This is one of the spookiest things I've ever seen, but Ballmer running around and shreking like a chimp comes a close second.
TWW
Re:as long as I have the option of not installing
on
More on KDE Groupware
·
· Score: 2
if Linux were exactly like Windows, do you think that anyone would ever again PAY for Windows?
Of course they would, since it would still be included in the proce of the computer. If Linux==Windows there really is no reason to switch for the vast numbers of people that think Windows comes free because they don't get an itemised bill.
Instead, it will present them with an interface that 99% of the computer using population is already familiar and comfortable with.
Yes, a shit one. You remind me of the stories of car manufacturers that spent time trying to duplicate reins instead of going over to steering wheels.
Basically what you are saying boils down to "we fear and hate change". Well, that's your problem and I don't care if you think I'm being "egotistical", "elitest" or even "1337" because I don't want you to hold me back.
This is the issue: an IE-only page is not a web page, it's just a page.
If I use the tag <mango> is it reasonable that I expect every browser to know that I mean "make the following text flash black/mango"? Is it any more reasonable if I'm rich?
If Windows has a bug in it that causes my companies application to not work then it's up to me as a developer to code around that bug to make it work.
That's true in the short term. What you are talking about are not "bugs" in the sense that they will eventually get fixed, they a are deliberate attempts to break the standard and force everyone else to be behind the development curve of the new MS-standard. Only an idiot of a developer would agree to that because in the long run it means that MS can put them out of work at the drop of a hat.
They just want a web browser that displays web pages. If Mozilla/Phoenix can't, they won't use it, plain and simple
Mozilla (which I personally can't stand) can and does render web pages. It just doesn't render "some guff we made up this morning"-pages too well.
I know what you mean but I think you are being naive if you think there's no down side to the developers or users of going down this path. The markup wars that left us with confused margin attributes and incompatable JavaScript show very clearly that what you are suggesting makes things worse for everyone in the long run.
Think about this: what does MS get out of making non-standard tags available. It isn't a warm fuzzy glow from helping users.
So you're saying that programmers should do extra work and lose their freedom becase some web designer is lazy? Why don't you whine at the designer that made the broken pages? And how do you suggest that browsers cope with a page which is not in HTML anyway?
Would it be so wrong to add in what is needed so IE pages render correctly?
Yes, it would. MS put these things in to make you say that, to make you WANT the standard to be given over to them and force everyone else to play catch-up with IE.
It has to be resisted or there's no hope for quality software and sometimes that can be anoying or inconvienient but that's the price of not letting Bill decide where you want to go to today.
Amen to that, but it's not a simple answer: it doesn't make the patents go away.
If companies that take out trivial patents like this kept getting punished by losing their customers then the patents would go away. But I'm not holding my breath.
I don't really care if someone releases "Aliens" with all the "fuck"s taken out so long as they mark it as bing modified. But, what if someone recut "Apocalypse Now" to make it a pro-war action movie? That's going too far.
I think the best compromise it to allow recutting like this but also allow writers/directors to sue for misrepresentation if they think its gone too far.
I have a copy of 2001 which I cut 5 minutes off the boring sequence where Dave's flying over the blue Scotish moorland and I can tell you, it makes the film better no matter what Kubrick might have said about cutting his vision.
TWW
Re:Two powerful commands on the OS X command line
on
More Switching Stories
·
· Score: 3, Funny
open -a "Microsoft Word"
There is no reason to use MS Word anymore, it is a dying project and good riddance.
This was suggested in an issue of Scientific American sometime back in the mid or early 80's. I remember it because I stole the idea to apply to my Traveller campaign to reduce the number of stolen space ships.
The idea was that the hull of each spacecraft was coated in embedded diamonds (cheap in the future because DeBeers' monopoly is gone). The police can then read your hull with a laser from 1 million miles away and you can't forge the "number plate".
Um...Yes! Read the intro to (and indeed the whole of) Hero With a Thousand Faces and if you don't laugh at it you probably think Sigmund Fraud was a scientist. Total bullshit from start to end.
Campbell was a deluded idiot taken in by Fraudian BS which he applied more or less at random to those stories which could be made to fit while ignoring those that didn't. Who cares if Star Wars fits his shitty formula story telling? If I want formula story telling I can get it on TV any time I want.
This is not to say that Star Wars has been a goldmine of originality, of course.
Slashdot Mirror
If you don't have an /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 then send /etc/X11/XF86Config.
TWW
I've never paid that sort of money for a computer.
TWW
Yes, sorry.
TWW
I was making a more general point about Apple hardware than just laptops but, in fact, the price difference is even worse in the laptop market than the desktop. Some of that is made up for in quality but not enough.
TWW
The truth is that unless someone gets me a "good price" on the hardware there's no chance that I'll get OSX. The interface is quite nice, although that's not enough on its own, and the hardware is great but then a 1930's Bentley is a really nice car but I ain't got the cash.
How much Intel can 500 quid buy? What fraction of an Apple would the same money buy?
TWW
TWW
A program which controls access to the hardware while providing an API for other programs to request access that hardware is an OS for the hardware it has control over. The Linux Kernel generally has control over all the hardware on your machine, therefor it's the OS for your machine.
There are other definitions but I find this one the most realistic and least prone to endless debates about where the OS ends and applications start.
TWW
Linux is the OS and the user may or may not run GNU software on it. With KDE and OpenOffice there are many users who never see a GNU program from one day to the next. Redefining the term "Operating System" to include the programs RMS likes to use is not a valid argument.
I wish RMS would just piss off now, he's become counter-productive to the whole free-software movement and seems to exist solely for the purpose of making it look bad.
TWW
Even better than that: you don't need to use them at all! WindowMaker keeps me happy.
I think that your father-in-law is slightly unusual. None of the Windows users I've known in the last nearly 10 years has ever bought an upgrade, they just get a new machine or make do with the version they had. And, of course, the new machines had new versions "free" with them. You are right about Dell and Gateway but their problem is not price, it's MS's muscle that stops them selling Linux machines.
TWW
But how many of the consoles could you buy for the price of that gamer's PC? Pretty well all of them and you would have the assurance that you'll be playing games without upgrades for at least three years after a console's launch and probably five.
It doesn't make economic sense to only play games on a PC. It hardly even makes economic sense to keep your work PC at a standard where you can keep playing current games on it.
TWW
I remember seeing a chimp with Down's Syndrome: it walked fully upright like a human. This is one of the spookiest things I've ever seen, but Ballmer running around and shreking like a chimp comes a close second.
TWW
Of course they would, since it would still be included in the proce of the computer. If Linux==Windows there really is no reason to switch for the vast numbers of people that think Windows comes free because they don't get an itemised bill.
Instead, it will present them with an interface that 99% of the computer using population is already familiar and comfortable with.
Yes, a shit one. You remind me of the stories of car manufacturers that spent time trying to duplicate reins instead of going over to steering wheels.
Basically what you are saying boils down to "we fear and hate change". Well, that's your problem and I don't care if you think I'm being "egotistical", "elitest" or even "1337" because I don't want you to hold me back.
TWW
This is the issue: an IE-only page is not a web page, it's just a page.
If I use the tag <mango> is it reasonable that I expect every browser to know that I mean "make the following text flash black/mango"? Is it any more reasonable if I'm rich?
If Windows has a bug in it that causes my companies application to not work then it's up to me as a developer to code around that bug to make it work.
That's true in the short term. What you are talking about are not "bugs" in the sense that they will eventually get fixed, they a are deliberate attempts to break the standard and force everyone else to be behind the development curve of the new MS-standard. Only an idiot of a developer would agree to that because in the long run it means that MS can put them out of work at the drop of a hat.
They just want a web browser that displays web pages. If Mozilla/Phoenix can't, they won't use it, plain and simple
Mozilla (which I personally can't stand) can and does render web pages. It just doesn't render "some guff we made up this morning"-pages too well.
I know what you mean but I think you are being naive if you think there's no down side to the developers or users of going down this path. The markup wars that left us with confused margin attributes and incompatable JavaScript show very clearly that what you are suggesting makes things worse for everyone in the long run.
Think about this: what does MS get out of making non-standard tags available. It isn't a warm fuzzy glow from helping users.
TWW
TWW
Yes, it would. MS put these things in to make you say that, to make you WANT the standard to be given over to them and force everyone else to play catch-up with IE.
It has to be resisted or there's no hope for quality software and sometimes that can be anoying or inconvienient but that's the price of not letting Bill decide where you want to go to today.
TWW
Yeah, the wife will like that just fine!
TWW
If companies that take out trivial patents like this kept getting punished by losing their customers then the patents would go away. But I'm not holding my breath.
TWW
TWW
I think the best compromise it to allow recutting like this but also allow writers/directors to sue for misrepresentation if they think its gone too far.
I have a copy of 2001 which I cut 5 minutes off the boring sequence where Dave's flying over the blue Scotish moorland and I can tell you, it makes the film better no matter what Kubrick might have said about cutting his vision.
TWW
There is no reason to use MS Word anymore, it is a dying project and good riddance.
TWW
The idea was that the hull of each spacecraft was coated in embedded diamonds (cheap in the future because DeBeers' monopoly is gone). The police can then read your hull with a laser from 1 million miles away and you can't forge the "number plate".
TWW
Um...Yes! Read the intro to (and indeed the whole of) Hero With a Thousand Faces and if you don't laugh at it you probably think Sigmund Fraud was a scientist. Total bullshit from start to end.
TWW
This is not to say that Star Wars has been a goldmine of originality, of course.
TWW
TWW