I actually dislike the naming a lot. I'm always confused about what version I have and what is a newer version. Do I have a hedgehog or a platypus? Is there a fix for my package or not? I'd rather just have 1, 2, 3, etc. Even the 7.10, 8.04 stuff is more confusing that it needs to be.
The thing is, windows uses code names internally but they're dropped once it gets to the outside world. Ubuntu forums and the bug system are full of references to curmudgeonly animals for new and old versions - which is very confusing to anyone who isn't a full-time developer or dedicated fan. And many fan sites use the code-names all the time. Sure the front page might not reference it but I don't think I've ever visited that in anger anyway - it's just easier to go to mirrors for download iso's and google for problem solving.
I just want a box that works and I can keep up to date. I don't want to have to learn and interpret a whole lexicon of unique language and non-standard version numbering in the process.
I'm also a bit peeved at them doing shit like turning on stack protection by default in gcc. When you start having to patch sources or use custom configure lines for them to work on a linux distro it gets a bit tiring. Sure if they want to build security-sensitive apps with it turned on go for it, but it's my computer I should be in charge of policies like that on my own code.
You could replace "i" everywhere with "sqrt(-1)" and everything would be the same. The fact that sqrt(-1) has no meaning in the physical world says nothing about using it to find a real answer; as long as the answer doesn't *contain* sqrt(-1). In fact, using imaginary numbers in calculations is very similar to using vectors.
The concept of negative energy OTOH, is not a mathematical device, and is *expected* to point to something "real". Ahah. Insightful point there. That's the problem with modern cosmology - they've replaced everything with mathematics, and forgotten it's just a model. They get a division by zero, and instead of saying 'well our model falls apart there, we'll just say it doesn't work at that point, even though it does well enough everywhere we need it to', as you might when modelling say, an electronic circuit (or ANYTHING else for that matter), they say 'ooh, black holes must exist!'. And then even though no black hole has ever been observed directly, they invent ways in which it might be observed indirectly to make it fit the observations to demonstrate the maths.
Why not stop posting this crap every time someone poses M$ in stories about this highly offensive company (to many) and leave everyone alone. People can make up their own mind, you don't need to force your opinion on them.
All you do is look like a childish anal retarded wanker who needs to mix with people more and realise that everyone is entitled to their own ideas and ways of expressing them.
It isn't even funny. It isn't even remotely funny, nor particularly entertaining, and barely makes sense for that matter.
And the stereotyping is just sad - but what do you expect from 'an outsider'. Not all technical people are 1. overweight, 2. wear druggie shirts, nor 3. give a shit about hackers. And it's also pushing that other sickening stereotype that seems to pervade American comedy - that guys are bumbling/overweight 'lovable fools' and girls are smart and classy/usually at least a bit hot.
A very strange form of viral marketing for their craptastic clone of the craptastic flash software though. I imagine it could only be dreamt up in the strange cultures that develop in the closed world that Microsoft and other large companies seem to develop. (Novell was almost cult-like, and a little scary to be honest). I bet they thought it would be really 'cool', 'nifty', and 'hip', and no doubt plenty of their cult-members think the same.
Umm, newsflash, the kde (or windows) file chooser isn't 'intuitive' either - fuck, they're not even easy to use.
The gnome one is awful, but so are the rest. I mean for fucks sake, in windows you double-click too slow and suddenly you're renaming files! Who wants to rename a file when opening it?
Oh if only CORBA were the problem - corba is actually quite light-weight in C. It isn't really any worse than gtk+ is (these days) - and probably lighter for the facilities it provides (e.g. == gtk+ + d-bus + other things). Although more work for the coder, but not 10x more work.
Bonobo was just a bad idea though, too fine-grained for what CORBA does, and hell it was based on fucking COM, so it was always a dumb idea... Most of the problem was with the design of the CORBA api's used in gnome. Not enough experience at the start, definitely not enough focus on performance, and then left with a legacy that everyone hated. Too many synchronous apis, and too many one-return methods, rather than async and batched, etc.
Well, it'll look like it's good enough for 90% of the people 90% of the time - when infact it wont quite meet those expecations - after everyone's spent too much time on it to back out.
And then they'll illegally bundle it with one of their 'server' os's, and effectively kill the market instantly.
You're going to buy a ps3, have a wii, but 'the xbox 360 is the best product'? Why would you buy inferior products (two of them!) given 'ms are great guys and they'll fix it, and it doesn't happen to most people anyway'?
I have brothers that work in engineering (manufacture) and mining - they have the same problem with all their younger employees. They expect more from doing less, and don't like being told what to do, when they clearly don't have the experience to work effectively otherwise.
This is a multi-industry, and seemingly world-wide (well, western I guess) problem.
Don't be an idiot. First, most linux installations are single-user. Nothing wrong with installing whatever the fuck you want in/usr/local. Secondly, if you have a compiler available on a multi-user system, there's no security difference between a user running a copy in/usr/local or running one in their home directory, assuming all other things equal (no setuid, etc).
It's just good practice for any linux/unix binary to write things to the current directory or a known directory - because it could easily be installed in a non-writeable location, or a location which shouldn't contain data files.
Apple couldn't care less about DRM, and it is only on ITS because the labels required it. I wouldn't be surpised if Jobs announces that itunes is going DRM free next week.
You stupid, pitiful fucking Apple sycophant. Apple wants DRM, because Apple controls the software and hardware. The labels only THINK they want DRM, because they don't understand how technology works - and don't (or didn't until now) realize just what DRM really means (approved, authorized software and hardware).
Apple and Jobs have a massive hard-on for DRM/Trusted Computing...... just like Bill Gates and Microsoft.
If you can't see how stupidly obvious this is you need to think a bit harder. It goes even further for both - as a means of promoting their other hardware/software platforms.
You can't take anything the big-wigs of any of these companies say at face value (e.g. Steve Jobbies doesn't want DRM).
mono and moonlight are separate projects - they just happen to be directed by the same people.
mono is a.net runtime/compiler written in c/c#. moonlight is written in c++ and for 1.0 wouldn't even require a.net runtime, since it only needs javascript... hmm, i.e. it IS an incompatible flash.
it is also rather immature - people are talking about it like it's a finished product. It isn't, it's just a development project at this point in time.
Wow so little humour in the replies to the parent post.
FWIW I always read it like that too... Physicists all seem to get a hell of a hard-on for what it will do, I'm sure plenty of engineers would for the sheer size of the machine, and governments and accountants over its cost.
I think it's a rather obvious and appropriate pun on the name.
This is getting a bit of a joke. Maybe slashdot likes to filter out the more boring space stories, but they all seem to have astronomers shaking their head at some new result which contradicts 'known theory'.
Given that you can't do real science experiments in space, and only look at pretty pictures and make abstract mathematical models, I guess it isn't surprising the 'experts' don't really know what's going on out there.
So.. if the temperature is out by 5x, doesn't that mean their modeling is rubbish? Or are they just going to explain it away with a small tweak to make this 'new fact' fit?
When's the last time an astronomer wasn't 'surprised' by some new discovery in space? Is this really science, or just expensive fantasy, barely better than astrology?
Slashdot Mirror
I actually dislike the naming a lot. I'm always confused about what version I have and what is a newer version. Do I have a hedgehog or a platypus? Is there a fix for my package or not? I'd rather just have 1, 2, 3, etc. Even the 7.10, 8.04 stuff is more confusing that it needs to be.
The thing is, windows uses code names internally but they're dropped once it gets to the outside world. Ubuntu forums and the bug system are full of references to curmudgeonly animals for new and old versions - which is very confusing to anyone who isn't a full-time developer or dedicated fan. And many fan sites use the code-names all the time. Sure the front page might not reference it but I don't think I've ever visited that in anger anyway - it's just easier to go to mirrors for download iso's and google for problem solving.
I just want a box that works and I can keep up to date. I don't want to have to learn and interpret a whole lexicon of unique language and non-standard version numbering in the process.
I'm also a bit peeved at them doing shit like turning on stack protection by default in gcc. When you start having to patch sources or use custom configure lines for them to work on a linux distro it gets a bit tiring. Sure if they want to build security-sensitive apps with it turned on go for it, but it's my computer I should be in charge of policies like that on my own code.
The concept of negative energy OTOH, is not a mathematical device, and is *expected* to point to something "real". Ahah. Insightful point there. That's the problem with modern cosmology - they've replaced everything with mathematics, and forgotten it's just a model. They get a division by zero, and instead of saying 'well our model falls apart there, we'll just say it doesn't work at that point, even though it does well enough everywhere we need it to', as you might when modelling say, an electronic circuit (or ANYTHING else for that matter), they say 'ooh, black holes must exist!'. And then even though no black hole has ever been observed directly, they invent ways in which it might be observed indirectly to make it fit the observations to demonstrate the maths.
Why not stop posting this crap every time someone poses M$ in stories about this highly offensive company (to many) and leave everyone alone. People can make up their own mind, you don't need to force your opinion on them.
All you do is look like a childish anal retarded wanker who needs to mix with people more and realise that everyone is entitled to their own ideas and ways of expressing them.
It isn't even funny. It isn't even remotely funny, nor particularly entertaining, and barely makes sense for that matter.
And the stereotyping is just sad - but what do you expect from 'an outsider'. Not all technical people are 1. overweight, 2. wear druggie shirts, nor 3. give a shit about hackers. And it's also pushing that other sickening stereotype that seems to pervade American comedy - that guys are bumbling/overweight 'lovable fools' and girls are smart and classy/usually at least a bit hot.
A very strange form of viral marketing for their craptastic clone of the craptastic flash software though. I imagine it could only be dreamt up in the strange cultures that develop in the closed world that Microsoft and other large companies seem to develop. (Novell was almost cult-like, and a little scary to be honest). I bet they thought it would be really 'cool', 'nifty', and 'hip', and no doubt plenty of their cult-members think the same.
Has a map of the whole world, not just a small part of it:
http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,25642,23136815-5014239,00.html
Oddly enough I just had to 'sweat' to get rid of some useless bloat in a system I installed with ubuntu only a couple of days ago.
Getting rid of GDM/gnome desktop/'tracker' before the system became only half as responsive as my old redhat 9 system used to be (on slower hardware).
So don't worry - everyone's 'doing it'.
No, they just make a slow interface feel slower. Computers are there do to work for you, not entertain you while they're twiddling their thumbs.
Umm, newsflash, the kde (or windows) file chooser isn't 'intuitive' either - fuck, they're not even easy to use.
The gnome one is awful, but so are the rest. I mean for fucks sake, in windows you double-click too slow and suddenly you're renaming files! Who wants to rename a file when opening it?
a gconf-tool now there's a great user-friendly interface.
a registry on linux! yay!
Oh if only CORBA were the problem - corba is actually quite light-weight in C. It isn't really any worse than gtk+ is (these days) - and probably lighter for the facilities it provides (e.g. == gtk+ + d-bus + other things). Although more work for the coder, but not 10x more work.
... Most of the problem was with the design of the CORBA api's used in gnome. Not enough experience at the start, definitely not enough focus on performance, and then left with a legacy that everyone hated. Too many synchronous apis, and too many one-return methods, rather than async and batched, etc.
Bonobo was just a bad idea though, too fine-grained for what CORBA does, and hell it was based on fucking COM, so it was always a dumb idea
So either "we don't really know anything about grb's", or the device isn't useful for doing what it was built for - not sensitive enough for example.
Well, probably both. Astronomers never seem to stop being "surprised" by just about everything they "discover".
Well, it'll look like it's good enough for 90% of the people 90% of the time - when infact it wont quite meet those expecations - after everyone's spent too much time on it to back out.
And then they'll illegally bundle it with one of their 'server' os's, and effectively kill the market instantly.
Were you paid to write this?
You're going to buy a ps3, have a wii, but 'the xbox 360 is the best product'? Why would you buy inferior products (two of them!) given 'ms are great guys and they'll fix it, and it doesn't happen to most people anyway'?
But in the os space, Apple aren't a monopoly.
I have brothers that work in engineering (manufacture) and mining - they have the same problem with all their younger employees. They expect more from doing less, and don't like being told what to do, when they clearly don't have the experience to work effectively otherwise.
This is a multi-industry, and seemingly world-wide (well, western I guess) problem.
What a stupid comment.
What the fuck does a computer science degree have to do with using a piece of modelling software?
Well you obviously didn't do English anyway, since Blender and ease of use are not mentioned in the same sentence at all.
Don't be an idiot. First, most linux installations are single-user. Nothing wrong with installing whatever the fuck you want in /usr/local. Secondly, if you have a compiler available on a multi-user system, there's no security difference between a user running a copy in /usr/local or running one in their home directory, assuming all other things equal (no setuid, etc).
It's just good practice for any linux/unix binary to write things to the current directory or a known directory - because it could easily be installed in a non-writeable location, or a location which shouldn't contain data files.
You can't take anything the big-wigs of any of these companies say at face value (e.g. Steve Jobbies doesn't want DRM).
mono and moonlight are separate projects - they just happen to be directed by the same people.
.net runtime/compiler written in c/c#. moonlight is written in c++ and for 1.0 wouldn't even require a .net runtime, since it only needs javascript ... hmm, i.e. it IS an incompatible flash.
mono is a
it is also rather immature - people are talking about it like it's a finished product. It isn't, it's just a development project at this point in time.
Lunch time doubly so, of course.
Wow so little humour in the replies to the parent post.
... Physicists all seem to get a hell of a hard-on for what it will do, I'm sure plenty of engineers would for the sheer size of the machine, and governments and accountants over its cost.
FWIW I always read it like that too
I think it's a rather obvious and appropriate pun on the name.
This is getting a bit of a joke. Maybe slashdot likes to filter out the more boring space stories, but they all seem to have astronomers shaking their head at some new result which contradicts 'known theory'.
Given that you can't do real science experiments in space, and only look at pretty pictures and make abstract mathematical models, I guess it isn't surprising the 'experts' don't really know what's going on out there.
So .. if the temperature is out by 5x, doesn't that mean their modeling is rubbish? Or are they just going to explain it away with a small tweak to make this 'new fact' fit?
When's the last time an astronomer wasn't 'surprised' by some new discovery in space? Is this really science, or just expensive fantasy, barely better than astrology?
WTF? The guys' gonna die and he goes to the arsehole who made him and calls him father? Why cut out 'fucker', it makes much more sense.
You're joking right?
IE6 was nothing special and IE7 took forever and just fucked up the menu's.