>An LED is less efficient than an incandescent bulb.
Which LED? Which incandescent bulb?
If you're talking about, say, old SiC blue LED's compared to a 100W incandescent, you're right.
If you're talking about a modern white LED (phosphor over GaN or InGaN, usually) compared to that same 100W incandescent, you're dead wrong.
If you're talking about colored incandescents vs. monochromatic GaN/InGaN LED's, you're so far wrong that three lefts won't make you right. In fact, current red/orange LED's are about as efficient as compact fluourescents. That's mighty mighty, as the man said.
Ah, but this passage:...or of fraudulently inducing the belief that he or she is a peace officer...
makes the line much harder to tiptoe around. If you were such a pinkerton, and were asked, "are you a peace officer?", you might be tempted to answer (menacingly) something which affirmed your (non-existent) right to harass, confiscate, and/or incarcerate.
At which point you are in violation. You don't even have to answer, "Yes, I am" - you just have to induce the belief. At least, according to MY reading of that passage.
Of course, IANAL and don't want to be. Nor do I support the sale of bootlegged CDs on the streets. I'm simply pointing out another interpretation.
Regardless of whether they are going after true bootleggers or not, it isn't their job and that's why the statute you pointed to is in place. Good find.
Then you didn't read it carefully. Parent was clearly talking about installations of Unix, as in SCO's version of Unix - not about Solaris, AIX, IRIX, HP-UX, etc.
No one questions that your Solaris and AIX are more popular in the datacenter than Linux.
"And I would also hope he knows that Mandrake is in no way more full featured, powerful, stable, or fully open-sourced than Slackware or a variety of other more pure Linux distros."
I'm sure he knows quite well how his distro stacks up against the rest. I'm sure he knows in what ways it differs, and in what ways it's the same. I think it telling that his first criterion was "friendly", not "pure".
Exactly what do you mean by "more pure"? Do you mean idealogically pure? Chemically? Do you mean "less friendly"? Unprofitable? More difficult to use? Less cluttered? Less restricted by closed-source code? I'm asking, seriously.
While I understand the suggestion that such an ubergeek as Gael Duval wouldn't *need* a more friendly distro, he might *want* one. Even those of us who are able to recompile the kernel with a new driver we've written in order to use our new MegaMouse might prefer to have the distro simply find it and use it. In fact, it seems to me that ease-of-use is one of Mandrake's primary goals.
It seems to me that "friendly" is a useful characteristic. Perhaps Mandrake would be even better if it had "Don't Panic" written in large friendly letters on the front cover.
I would suggest, furthermore, that this goal of being "friendly" is likely to have more useful impact on the adoption of Linux for desktop use than the "learn everything about everything" approach of, say, a Slackware. Which is not to imply the greater validity for one approach over the other, of course. Horses for courses, I'd say.
Agreed. Bought my FG in '86 the week before my tour of Europe. Made many nice photos, and it still operates perfectly. Program mode works wonderfully, and of course you can operate it fully manually.
For those of you who haven't bothered to check (like me up until a few minutes ago), parent poster is a troll. "Amsterdam Vallon" is a character in "Gangs of New York", not an associate professor of computer science at Slaughter College. I'm fairly sure about this, as I can't seem to find any mention of Slaughter College anywhere on the 'net. Of course, if "Amsterdam Vallon" is representative of their faculty, they probably are afraid to connect to the Internet or even plug their computers into the wall.
Is there such a thing as an Amish computer scientist?
I'd like to see AV work on his content, but he seems to be working up some pretty good troll-fu. Congrats. We need better trolls, 'round hereabouts.
So, you have any evidence at all that any of these things are true? You have links to peer-reviewed scientific publications? Are you, yourself, an M.D. or a Ph.D. specializing in electromagnetics? Have *you* studied the effects, harmful or otherwise, of the electromagnetic effects of the levels of RF typical of cellphones at normal usage distances? Do you understand the difference between ionizing radiation and non-ionizing radiation? The difference between RF and AF? Do you even know what sort of frequency range this device operates in?
Perhaps, sir, if you REALLY want to warn the rest of us, you could provide some links and some science instead of baseless fearmongering.
No. Me either. You assume that his blanket statement that Linux isn't ready for the desktop was really a cleverly camouflaged cry for help. I don't buy it. I saw a troll.
You wanna yell at me for discouraging people who try Linux? Fine. I encourage that. But this wasn't it.
My apologies if the original poster really did think that 2 hours of NetHack is sufficient experience for him to unilaterally declare that Linux is unusable for the rest of us as a desktop OS. At that point, I cannot fault him for the opinion at which he arrived. I can, however, fault him for his methodology, which might actually deserve the sobriquet of "doofus" which I gave him.
Or, if ( as I believe is more likely ) HE is a troll - then I owe no one any apologies at all. I don't buy his story - it's too ignorant of Linux practices in one breath, and far too knowledgeable of those practices in the next. It's the "20 minutes to copy a file troll" all over again. Such people are not deserving of courtesy.
While you're getting all worked up about my tone, why not try reading the content as well - mine and his. See if you can spot a logical flaw or two.
Pardon my attitude. People who ask questions get answers. People who spout bullshit get shit in return.
The guy said he couldn't install binaries on a LiveEval CD. Said he played NetHack for two hours, and went back to Windows.
At what point did he ask for help? None. He told me (us) flat out that Linux wasn't ready for the desktop because - wait for it - he couldn't run software that wasn't included on the CD. I offered a contradictory example, the one I knew best.
Ball 1: Guy's on Slashdot. Says he's a subscriber. Looks for a compiler. Seems reasonable to assume that he knows what "pre-compiled binary" means. Let's call this point rather poor.
Ball 2: Well, OK. On the corner. Perhaps I allowed his obvious trolling to push my buttons. Nonetheless, he didn't ask for help. Therefore, he didn't get it. He made a wide, sweeping blanket statement which was rooted in his ignorance (not a pejorative, it's true) and very little fact. I got annoyed.
Ball 3: In the dirt. GAIM binaries are all over the place. Even for SuSE. No compiler needed. I could maybe agree with "SuSE LiveEval isn't ready for the desktop," but one distro missing a package he wants does not mean Linux isn't.
Ball 4: same as ball 2. He's not a potential user. He's much happier where he is. Fine. I insulted a doofus, by calling him a doofus. Not because he wants to run Windows, that's fine with me - but because he acted like a doofus.
Don't like my attitude? OK. What did YOU do to help the guy? Nothing. Because he doesn't want help, he wants to stir up those dirty Lunix hippies. Which he did. YHBT - and not by me.
What's your point? The guy runs a LiveEval CD for two hours, can't get 2 pieces of software that aren't burned on the CD to work, and realizes that Linux Isn't Ready For The Desktop? This is criticism?
I'm not calling him a lying asshole. I called him a doofus.
And, dude, I'm sorry. Gaim does work just fine. Click on the.rpm, type in your root password, run the program. You want help? Ask me for help. Telling me that it doesn't work based on a CD that doesn't include it is not asking for help. Saying "How do I get GAIM running on SuSE LiveEval," is asking for help. "Uh, I ran NetHack for two hours. Linux isn't ready for the desktop" is not.
Well. Good thing you finally told me. Here I've been running Linux on my desktop for years, thinking it worked. Silly me.
I have never had any trouble finding pre-compiled binaries for gaim. Not when I was running SuSE, not now that I'm running Mandrake.
But no, I was wrong. You, with your two hours of NetHack, you have brought me to the light. It's back to Windows for me. Thank you, oh gods of astroturf.
My interpretation? Not having software installed != usability issues. Last time I checked, Windows didn't come with a compiler installed either... and to run AIM, you had to install pre-compiled binaries. But Linux must be unusable if your demo CD doesn't have everything you ever wanted to use pre-installed.
Doofus. Seriously. Your logic sucks ass. Think before you troll^W^W^W^W^W post, OK?
Slashdot Mirror
No, no, no. I'm certain I've met a rabid lawyer. Unless you're telling me that you can infect pond scum with rabies.
No, I'm more likely to start a post with "Err..."
Why do you ask?
And what's with the "GO LORD!"? YARIDG?
Quoth rw2: "Spend that money on ground based observatories with advanced systems that allow better than hubble imaging from earth."
Are there any? Doesn't atmospheric distortion limit the imaging ability of ground-based systems?
I did *not* know that. Thank you.
Err... but does it have a little plastic toothpick? Can opener?
Yeah, OK, it's lame now. Sigh.
Thank you. I gotta start using [sarcasm] tags.
Wow, FireWire 400, 800 *AND* iLink / DV ? How did they do THAT?
And, it not only does USB 2 but 1.1 as well? That's amazing!
Now, does it have a Philips-head screwdriver, too?
>An LED is less efficient than an incandescent bulb.
/InGaN LED's, you're so far wrong that three lefts won't make you right. In fact, current red/orange LED's are about as efficient as compact fluourescents. That's mighty mighty, as the man said.
Which LED? Which incandescent bulb?
If you're talking about, say, old SiC blue LED's compared to a 100W incandescent, you're right.
If you're talking about a modern white LED (phosphor over GaN or InGaN, usually) compared to that same 100W incandescent, you're dead wrong.
If you're talking about colored incandescents vs. monochromatic GaN
May I suggest Don Klipstein's Lighting Info Site! as a gentle introduction to the current state of affairs in LED lighting?
I really don't think you know the field well enough to make sweeping statements like that.
Last time I checked, Al Queda wasn't using cold-calling to recruit new suicide bombers...
See? That nation-wide no-call list is good for *something*!
Ah, but this passage: ...or of fraudulently inducing the belief that he or she is a peace officer...
makes the line much harder to tiptoe around. If you were such a pinkerton, and were asked, "are you a peace officer?", you might be tempted to answer (menacingly) something which affirmed your (non-existent) right to harass, confiscate, and/or incarcerate.
At which point you are in violation. You don't even have to answer, "Yes, I am" - you just have to induce the belief. At least, according to MY reading of that passage.
Of course, IANAL and don't want to be. Nor do I support the sale of bootlegged CDs on the streets. I'm simply pointing out another interpretation.
Regardless of whether they are going after true bootleggers or not, it isn't their job and that's why the statute you pointed to is in place. Good find.
I don't agree with that statement at all.
Then you didn't read it carefully. Parent was clearly talking about installations of Unix, as in SCO's version of Unix - not about Solaris, AIX, IRIX, HP-UX, etc.
No one questions that your Solaris and AIX are more popular in the datacenter than Linux.
Sigh.
Haploid.
"And I would also hope he knows that Mandrake is in no way more full featured, powerful, stable, or fully open-sourced than Slackware or a variety of other more pure Linux distros."
I'm sure he knows quite well how his distro stacks up against the rest. I'm sure he knows in what ways it differs, and in what ways it's the same. I think it telling that his first criterion was "friendly", not "pure".
Exactly what do you mean by "more pure"? Do you mean idealogically pure? Chemically? Do you mean "less friendly"? Unprofitable? More difficult to use? Less cluttered? Less restricted by closed-source code? I'm asking, seriously.
While I understand the suggestion that such an ubergeek as Gael Duval wouldn't *need* a more friendly distro, he might *want* one. Even those of us who are able to recompile the kernel with a new driver we've written in order to use our new MegaMouse might prefer to have the distro simply find it and use it. In fact, it seems to me that ease-of-use is one of Mandrake's primary goals.
It seems to me that "friendly" is a useful characteristic. Perhaps Mandrake would be even better if it had "Don't Panic" written in large friendly letters on the front cover.
I would suggest, furthermore, that this goal of being "friendly" is likely to have more useful impact on the adoption of Linux for desktop use than the "learn everything about everything" approach of, say, a Slackware. Which is not to imply the greater validity for one approach over the other, of course. Horses for courses, I'd say.
Nope. Doesn't happen to me. It certainly sounds like a misconfiguration somewhere, or perhaps an earlier (less stable ) version of Konqueror.
Here's how to check: try copying a file. If it takes 20 minutes, then Konqueror is broken. (it's funny; laugh)
Err... what version of Konqueror are you using? What distro?
Agreed. Bought my FG in '86 the week before my tour of Europe. Made many nice photos, and it still operates perfectly. Program mode works wonderfully, and of course you can operate it fully manually.
You'd be happy with an FG.
For those of you who haven't bothered to check (like me up until a few minutes ago), parent poster is a troll. "Amsterdam Vallon" is a character in "Gangs of New York", not an associate professor of computer science at Slaughter College. I'm fairly sure about this, as I can't seem to find any mention of Slaughter College anywhere on the 'net. Of course, if "Amsterdam Vallon" is representative of their faculty, they probably are afraid to connect to the Internet or even plug their computers into the wall.
Is there such a thing as an Amish computer scientist?
I'd like to see AV work on his content, but he seems to be working up some pretty good troll-fu. Congrats. We need better trolls, 'round hereabouts.
So, you have any evidence at all that any of these things are true? You have links to peer-reviewed scientific publications? Are you, yourself, an M.D. or a Ph.D. specializing in electromagnetics? Have *you* studied the effects, harmful or otherwise, of the electromagnetic effects of the levels of RF typical of cellphones at normal usage distances? Do you understand the difference between ionizing radiation and non-ionizing radiation? The difference between RF and AF? Do you even know what sort of frequency range this device operates in?
Perhaps, sir, if you REALLY want to warn the rest of us, you could provide some links and some science instead of baseless fearmongering.
Why not? We let 'em run for office...
No. Me either. You assume that his blanket statement that Linux isn't ready for the desktop was really a cleverly camouflaged cry for help. I don't buy it. I saw a troll.
You wanna yell at me for discouraging people who try Linux? Fine. I encourage that. But this wasn't it.
Er... a chip on my shoulder about what?
My apologies if the original poster really did think that 2 hours of NetHack is sufficient experience for him to unilaterally declare that Linux is unusable for the rest of us as a desktop OS. At that point, I cannot fault him for the opinion at which he arrived. I can, however, fault him for his methodology, which might actually deserve the sobriquet of "doofus" which I gave him.
Or, if ( as I believe is more likely ) HE is a troll - then I owe no one any apologies at all. I don't buy his story - it's too ignorant of Linux practices in one breath, and far too knowledgeable of those practices in the next. It's the "20 minutes to copy a file troll" all over again. Such people are not deserving of courtesy.
While you're getting all worked up about my tone, why not try reading the content as well - mine and his. See if you can spot a logical flaw or two.
Uh, yeah. It is. Busted. Good call. Somebody tell Alanis.
Pardon my attitude. People who ask questions get answers. People who spout bullshit get shit in return.
The guy said he couldn't install binaries on a LiveEval CD. Said he played NetHack for two hours, and went back to Windows.
At what point did he ask for help? None. He told me (us) flat out that Linux wasn't ready for the desktop because - wait for it - he couldn't run software that wasn't included on the CD. I offered a contradictory example, the one I knew best.
Ball 1: Guy's on Slashdot. Says he's a subscriber. Looks for a compiler. Seems reasonable to assume that he knows what "pre-compiled binary" means. Let's call this point rather poor.
Ball 2: Well, OK. On the corner. Perhaps I allowed his obvious trolling to push my buttons. Nonetheless, he didn't ask for help. Therefore, he didn't get it. He made a wide, sweeping blanket statement which was rooted in his ignorance (not a pejorative, it's true) and very little fact. I got annoyed.
Ball 3: In the dirt. GAIM binaries are all over the place. Even for SuSE. No compiler needed. I could maybe agree with "SuSE LiveEval isn't ready for the desktop," but one distro missing a package he wants does not mean Linux isn't.
Ball 4: same as ball 2. He's not a potential user. He's much happier where he is. Fine. I insulted a doofus, by calling him a doofus. Not because he wants to run Windows, that's fine with me - but because he acted like a doofus.
Don't like my attitude? OK. What did YOU do to help the guy? Nothing. Because he doesn't want help, he wants to stir up those dirty Lunix hippies. Which he did. YHBT - and not by me.
What's your point? The guy runs a LiveEval CD for two hours, can't get 2 pieces of software that aren't burned on the CD to work, and realizes that Linux Isn't Ready For The Desktop? This is criticism?
.rpm, type in your root password, run the program. You want help? Ask me for help. Telling me that it doesn't work based on a CD that doesn't include it is not asking for help. Saying "How do I get GAIM running on SuSE LiveEval," is asking for help. "Uh, I ran NetHack for two hours. Linux isn't ready for the desktop" is not.
I'm not calling him a lying asshole. I called him a doofus.
And, dude, I'm sorry. Gaim does work just fine. Click on the
Well. Good thing you finally told me. Here I've been running Linux on my desktop for years, thinking it worked. Silly me.
I have never had any trouble finding pre-compiled binaries for gaim. Not when I was running SuSE, not now that I'm running Mandrake.
But no, I was wrong. You, with your two hours of NetHack, you have brought me to the light. It's back to Windows for me. Thank you, oh gods of astroturf.
My interpretation? Not having software installed != usability issues. Last time I checked, Windows didn't come with a compiler installed either... and to run AIM, you had to install pre-compiled binaries. But Linux must be unusable if your demo CD doesn't have everything you ever wanted to use pre-installed.
Doofus. Seriously. Your logic sucks ass. Think before you troll^W^W^W^W^W post, OK?
Which sitcom is obese? Roseanne is off the air...