While the parent is supposed to be (and admittedly succeeds at being) funny, this kind of condascending attitude by lunix zealots is one of the major reasons why Linux and its incarnations will still take years (if ever) to really reach a point where anyone can use it.
Linux will never be ready for the desktop while random people are able to make clueless unfounded remarks saying "Linux isn't ready for the desktop" on web forums.
Hey, dude, I've been running a gentoo system for four years. The same system. It started at gcc 2.95.3 and XFree 4.2.0, now it's running gcc 4.1 and xorg 7.0. It's still working as good as ever and being upgraded near flawlessly.
I also run debian systems, which work well.
The truth is that Free software pundits need something to write about. There are people sitting down and actually putting the slog in to maintain packages to make everything 'just work'. There are also people coming up with crazy projects and making press releases. The second group give the pundits something to write and conject about.
In reality, in the corporate world, these press release crazies would be in management and would have the power to force engineers to start work on their new crazy idea and abandon dull maintenance.
Us Free software guys aren't going anywhere, thanks.
Well actually, this is exactly what it will do. As DRM becomes stricter (and it will have to to be 'uncrackable') it will have to be able to check that your machine isn't running debugging tools (or any software that it "doesn't like") in the background. That's what TPM was designed for. Once you've done that you've signed the keys to your computer over to Microsoft and/or media companies who can start turning things off as they please. Then you need a secure DRM'd graphics card to check that it's outputting to a secure DRM'd monitor to stop you from ripping content. And a secure DRM'd sound card to check that it's outputting SPDIF to a secure decoder to stop you from ripping content. And then will come secure DRM'd printers to make sure you're not ripping DRM'd documents.
And this is all basically technology that's designed to stop you doing what you want to do. And it'll be spreading all over your living room because you'll buy it because it will have a trendy name, a hip advert and be made by Apple.
This is a bit of a troll but then again I have no self restraint:
Typical macintosh user. If you want something, roll up your sleeves and do it. The reason there isn't a full macintosh port is that the vast majority of macintosh users just expect to be presented with something. They're consumers after all. The reason unix guys have loads of cool stuff (tm) is they're not afraid of ploughing ahead and doing something for themselves instead of being spoonfed.
It's not called Free software because it's a free lunch.
I loved that game. Along with sopwith. But it's one of those things that I thought was incredibly obscure and nobody else played. I know better these days.
I mean, I of course see the point of removing Jörg Schilling from the equation, but the guys from ark linux have already made a clean fork a few months ago called dvdrtools ( http://www.arklinux.org/projects/dvdrtools ) ( server seems to be down at the moment ).
hacking a grafted-on Windows 2000 version of NTOSKRNL.DLL while fending off the frothing-at-the-mouth system-file protection and changing HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\SystemEnhanc ementLayer\{0092-02D1-26E5-0990}\Security\Initiali zationProtocolIsTrue to 210 (decimal), then making sure never to install any patches.
Windows will never be ready for the desktop until you don't have to dictate arcane and obscure commands to a user who just wants to do something absolutely trivial.
No. Read a few computer engineering books. Microsoft call swap 'Virtual Memory' in their silly dialog boxes, and hence people think the two are now synonymous. Virtual memory is 'merely' the system that anonymises memory access for a process and provides it with a private address space. Page swapping is something that can be built beneath that.
Nope. The whole thing was streamed through an (admittedly low bitrate) realaudio stream. From official sources. From beginning to end. I remember listening to it for the first time.
Software has dependencies. It's not something you can hide from. A good long time ago someone came up with this idea called a shared object, or dynamic library. Use of dynamic libraries saves memory and disk space. But most importantly, applications sharing a dynamic library all share bug and security fixes.
Dynamic library xyz has a security flaw, update libxyz and all packages that use it get the fix. You don't have to get fixes from every application that might use it. Not that people tend to bother with security fixes for applications on MacOS.
An application being 'self contained' means really just distributing it with its own set of dynamic libraries which is functionally the same as just using static libraries. Fifteen copies of libxyz on your system. Do you trust that they're all safe versions?
And I'll let you in on a secret. That's basically what InstallShields do. Bundle dependencies with applications. And it would be perfectly possible for linux packages to all come with their own dependencies, they just choose not to. You know why? Because people decided it's retarded.
Your ideal 'solution' is basically ignoring shared objects and thus is like stepping back in time twenty years.
If it's Free software, it's not a problem. The distribution probably already packages it. If not, he could volunteer to package & maintain it as he's going to have to anyway.
Non-free software doesn't seem to have an ABI problem. I don't know if you've ever tried using skype, flash, realplayer, sun's java, maya...
First they go to great length explaining how they diversify on Red Hat, SUSE, Ubuntu and (sigh) Linspire and then he asks for a common API and installer?
You know what the funniest thing is? All of those distros he mentioned are GNOME distros (apart from linspire, but I doubt they will actually end up using that). So the API differences are tiny or non existant.
If I download a Linux install image or source, or just try to run a particular program on a bunch of different Linux boxes, I run into problems.
Doctor, it hurts when I do this!
Don't do it then.
The whole point of a distribution is to make sure ~10,000 disparate pieces of software work well together. By downloading some random blob that some clown has packaged without really understanding the distribution you're asking for trouble. And no automatic updates. Distributions have package repositories for a reason.
Slashdot Mirror
Linux will never be ready for the desktop while random people are able to make clueless unfounded remarks saying "Linux isn't ready for the desktop" on web forums.
Hey, dude, I've been running a gentoo system for four years. The same system. It started at gcc 2.95.3 and XFree 4.2.0, now it's running gcc 4.1 and xorg 7.0. It's still working as good as ever and being upgraded near flawlessly.
I also run debian systems, which work well.
The truth is that Free software pundits need something to write about. There are people sitting down and actually putting the slog in to maintain packages to make everything 'just work'. There are also people coming up with crazy projects and making press releases. The second group give the pundits something to write and conject about.
In reality, in the corporate world, these press release crazies would be in management and would have the power to force engineers to start work on their new crazy idea and abandon dull maintenance.
Us Free software guys aren't going anywhere, thanks.
Well actually, this is exactly what it will do. As DRM becomes stricter (and it will have to to be 'uncrackable') it will have to be able to check that your machine isn't running debugging tools (or any software that it "doesn't like") in the background. That's what TPM was designed for. Once you've done that you've signed the keys to your computer over to Microsoft and/or media companies who can start turning things off as they please. Then you need a secure DRM'd graphics card to check that it's outputting to a secure DRM'd monitor to stop you from ripping content. And a secure DRM'd sound card to check that it's outputting SPDIF to a secure decoder to stop you from ripping content. And then will come secure DRM'd printers to make sure you're not ripping DRM'd documents.
And this is all basically technology that's designed to stop you doing what you want to do. And it'll be spreading all over your living room because you'll buy it because it will have a trendy name, a hip advert and be made by Apple.
This is a bit of a troll but then again I have no self restraint:
Typical macintosh user. If you want something, roll up your sleeves and do it. The reason there isn't a full macintosh port is that the vast majority of macintosh users just expect to be presented with something. They're consumers after all. The reason unix guys have loads of cool stuff (tm) is they're not afraid of ploughing ahead and doing something for themselves instead of being spoonfed.
It's not called Free software because it's a free lunch.
Once they get TPM into common circulation, they can do whatever they want. Deactivate your machine at any time. They have the keys.
I loved that game. Along with sopwith. But it's one of those things that I thought was incredibly obscure and nobody else played. I know better these days.
Thank you, Sun P.R. department.
Even better are the hilariously bad patches he's tried to get into the kernel over the years.
I mean, I of course see the point of removing Jörg Schilling from the equation, but the guys from ark linux have already made a clean fork a few months ago called dvdrtools ( http://www.arklinux.org/projects/dvdrtools ) ( server seems to be down at the moment ).
Windows will never be ready for the desktop until you don't have to dictate arcane and obscure commands to a user who just wants to do something absolutely trivial.
No. Read a few computer engineering books. Microsoft call swap 'Virtual Memory' in their silly dialog boxes, and hence people think the two are now synonymous. Virtual memory is 'merely' the system that anonymises memory access for a process and provides it with a private address space. Page swapping is something that can be built beneath that.
Virtual memory is not the same thing as swap, you imbecile.
Ok, fair enough, it's not "TPM", but it ("LaGrande Technology") is a system that is chiefly aimed at enabling TPM.
if all Core2s didn't have built-in TPM.
'fraid that rules it out for me.
All these people are artists - so - they all have to agree with each other, rite? That's what art is, is it?
Nope. The whole thing was streamed through an (admittedly low bitrate) realaudio stream. From official sources. From beginning to end. I remember listening to it for the first time.
Why should you dictate that they have to sell you individual tracks?
Yes.
Do you also send letters telling people to "take the tambourine out of track #3" because your preference is just as important as the musician's?
Then don't buy 90% of albums.
No it is not.
Software has dependencies. It's not something you can hide from. A good long time ago someone came up with this idea called a shared object, or dynamic library. Use of dynamic libraries saves memory and disk space. But most importantly, applications sharing a dynamic library all share bug and security fixes.
Dynamic library xyz has a security flaw, update libxyz and all packages that use it get the fix. You don't have to get fixes from every application that might use it. Not that people tend to bother with security fixes for applications on MacOS.
An application being 'self contained' means really just distributing it with its own set of dynamic libraries which is functionally the same as just using static libraries. Fifteen copies of libxyz on your system. Do you trust that they're all safe versions?
And I'll let you in on a secret. That's basically what InstallShields do. Bundle dependencies with applications. And it would be perfectly possible for linux packages to all come with their own dependencies, they just choose not to. You know why? Because people decided it's retarded.
Your ideal 'solution' is basically ignoring shared objects and thus is like stepping back in time twenty years.
If it's Free software, it's not a problem. The distribution probably already packages it. If not, he could volunteer to package & maintain it as he's going to have to anyway.
Non-free software doesn't seem to have an ABI problem. I don't know if you've ever tried using skype, flash, realplayer, sun's java, maya...
You know what the funniest thing is? All of those distros he mentioned are GNOME distros (apart from linspire, but I doubt they will actually end up using that). So the API differences are tiny or non existant.
No they don't. They're not even close. What they have is a glorified tarball.
There is no dependency resolution, no automatic updates for apps, no upgrade system.
This is not package management.
Call your vendor for paid support? ok.
So.. why are you pretending you can't have a large supporting vendor (Novell, IBM, Redhat...) with Linux?
But blaming the little-to-no-documentation reverse-engineering hard-working driver developers does?
Doctor, it hurts when I do this!
Don't do it then.
The whole point of a distribution is to make sure ~10,000 disparate pieces of software work well together. By downloading some random blob that some clown has packaged without really understanding the distribution you're asking for trouble. And no automatic updates. Distributions have package repositories for a reason.