I agree with you that it would be only slightly more functional. I just like the idea of going to my prefs page and checking off the boxes I would like to read.
To get back to the topic at hand, I just got back from seeing the movie (and the eclipse) an hour ago. I understand some people questioning the need for the "rave" and the love scene, but if human survival depends on people reproducing like happy bunnies, then I guess that's a way to make the point AND appeal to Hollywood's need for formulaic scenes. Of course, if the world they know as Zion is another illusion, then it's still just philosophy.
Instead of having a point system for comment ratings, what if we had the ability to moderate to type. For example, instead of deducting points for being a troll or being off topic, just moderate (not unlike you do now) as troll, off topic, funny, insughtful, whatever. When a comment receives an acceptable number of moderations to a certain type, it becomes that type.
When you read slashdot with this system, you could then choose to read not by threashold, but by type. The default could be to read everything, or to read by everything except flamebait or troll, or whatever the editors want.
So we have donor eggs combined with donor sperm to create an embryo. Isn't this the same process used when people with fertility problems (such as low sperm count) go to the clinic for help?
This still brings up the argument that if life begins at conception (natural or lab induced), then you have what will develop into a baby. If this is a persons belief, then harvesting for stem cells is still destruction of life whether or not the embryo was created in a lab.
Before I start picking nits, I want to say that I liked the article, especially the conclusions, or Post-game analysis, as Mr. Barr puts it. However, I need to point out four points in the article that bugged me. After that, I also have to question the premise of the article itself.
1) "Since Microsoft has been in the operating system business for exactly 21 years (DOS 1 debuted August 12, 1981), and employs 50,000 souls, I expected Windows 2000's installation would be seamless, fast, and lightyears ahead of upstart Red Hat's by any measure I could concoct."
While Linux has been around approximately 10 years less than Microsoft by this statement, UNIX has been around much longer. The concepts and commands are well known. In any case, both Linux and Windows have been around long enough, and their features have evolved enough over time that it doesn't really matter any more how long either system has existed.
Also, I think it matters little how many people work for Microsoft. Of those 50,000 souls, it is only a small number that actually work on the development of OS code. I do not know how many people over the years have contributed to the development of the various programs that make up a Linux system, but I don't think this matters, either. There are many dedicated programmers working constantly on the kernel, the GUI, installers, and a host of other pieces of code that make up the entire system.
2) Red Hat, and Linux in general, is not an "upstart" anymore.
I usually expect to see comments like this in the mass media, or technology media specifically. I would hope, though, that at linuxworld.com they would know that Linux is no longer an upstart operating system. It's been around for a decade. It is in use in business all over. It is as much a contender in the server arena as any other system. As a desktop OS for Joe Everyman, I can go along with the Linux as newcomer schtick. But remember, perception is everything in the media. If you want to get over the newcomer image, then you need to start treating the system as if it is common knowledge that it is the best thing to come along since <insert favorite technological advance here>.
3) "The clock was striking high noon as I inserted the first of three Sony System Restore CDs supplied with the laptop. I sat back to see what might happen."
I don't have a Sony laptop, so I am speaking without knowledge here, but in my experience with other computer systems, using the vendor's restore CD is NOT the same thing as installing Windows from Microsoft's media. That seems to make the comparison, as well as rest of this article irrelevant, but I will continue.
4) Windows Update
I agree with Mr. Barr that it is stupid of Microsoft to make the user install so many updates individually. It is still a nice way to apply patches, though. I am thankful for any group who makes automated processes for upgrading and maintaining systems. While I am capable of applying updates individually, or recompiling my kernel, or upgrading apache, or anything else I want to do, I want to spend time using my system, not upgrading or patching it. I remember the annoyance of applying fixpacks to OS/2. Upgrades to Novell NetWare 3.X and 4.X, while simple, were a pain. For Linux, Red Hat has up2date, Mandrake has its Software Manager, Debian as apt-get. (I know there are more, but these are the only ones with which I have some familiarity.) For me, they are all good. They save time. The one trade off to always keep in mind, however, is that it is easy to rely on these automatic updates, even if the latest fixes are not available with them. It goes without saying that this can be insufficient when there are serious security flaws to fix.
A final point.
While I am all for comparing operating systems and the philosophies behind their design, I must question the necessity of comparing things like installation ease and boot times. While I agree that it is good to make the installation of an operating system or an application as easy as possible, after a certain point it should become a non-issue. What matters much more is what work one is able to accomplish with the machine. Unless I am in a lab evaluating a bunch of systems, I don't want to spend my days installing Linux (or Windows, or OS X, or BSD, or anything else). I want to spend my days using the computer to do things. I want to visit web sites, I want to send and receive email and faxes, I want to send and receive instant messages. I want to use my printer, scanner, camera, PDA, etc. I understand that until I can order from Dell or Gateway, or walk into Best Buy, and purchase a system with Linux pre-installed, there will be some need to make the case for easy installation, but let's not focus so much on installer programs that we forget about making the system easy to use.
I take care of a Eudora Worldmail system as part of my duties with my employer. For what it does, it works fine. It has never crashed on me, and handles our small office (60 people) just fine.
My only problem is the whole shared address book thing. I think that is the reason why so many people use MS Exchange with the Outlook client. We have a kludgy solution to that problem, but it is only useable because there are sp few people here.
I wish I had the coding skills to do this - I would like nothing more than to be able to install a Linux system that had a single server application to handle all of the following:
Email, with accounts based on system users and/or custom users.
Multiple shared address books managed on the server. (Accessed with Evolution/Outlook/...)
Group and List management abilities
Shared user/group scheduling
I know there are separate applications to handle many of these things, but one comprehensive package would be nice.
Does anyone know what is out there in the Open Source world to handle the scheduling and the shared address parts of all this? (Unfortunately, I have been a slave to MS for far too long and am only now starting to learn the ways of UNIX. So far, it's quite refreshing.)
Interestingly enough, when I was at Iowa State (graduated Dec. 1994), I think they were still using TeX for thesis papers. It was some time in the mid to late 1990's that they switched to MS Word. It's sad.
Well I don't know about that. After getting to know a few people online -- who seemed to have very elegant prose -- they seemed like complete nimwits with nothing intelligent to say in person.
I'm not saying that there's something wrong with having time to compose yourself -- but it allows some people to present themselves as things they are not by just doing a couple of quick web searches. You can't exactly put someone on the spot when e-mailing can you?:)
As to the people appearing to be nimwits in person, that's not so odd. I find that when I take the time to think about something, write my thoughts, and then rewrite them, I am able to express what I am thinking more clearly than when I am in a face to face conversation.
As far as someone looking up stuff on the web, that's OK if they tell you they are quoting something. Also, assuming they are doing good research, they should be commended for actually backing up their statements with some kind of support. (Again, this is assuming that they are doing good research.)
Finally, I think a conversation, or a debate, is better served when both sides are trying to share ideas, not put someone on the spot. For me, email seems to help this.
I hear ya. I think it's a combination of an inquisitive mind searching for truth and the need for balance.
Everyone needs to find a proper balance of physical, mental, spiritual, and social activity, or you just don't feel right. (I'm not a doctor, teacher, priest, or the life of the party, so I can't tell you what amount of each you need.)
The only advice I can give is keep searching and DO NOT GIVE UP.
For me, it's taking the hacker (inquisitive) nature and applying it to life as well as computers.
Doing that has helped me immensely in work, faith, fun, and everything else.
The article isn't bad, and is a goog beginning for summing up the history of Linux and presenting it's case for business use, but as I was reading it I had the impression it was talking down to the poor, stupid manager.
As we know, a majority of those put in the suit positions tend to be ignorant of all things technical and highly illogical in their decision making, but they aren't necessarily stupid. (There's a difference, you know.)
The facts are there, but now let's get the diplomacy down. There's no reason we can't use the smooth talk that our "friends" at MS are famous for, especially since we know we have the technical upper hand.
Remember, this aspect of Linux evangelism competes not against another operating system, but with the MS schmoozers who are convincing management that their product is the best thing since canned beer. (Yes, I know bottled is better, and the tap even better than that, but I like the phrase.)
That's my $0.02.
By the way, if anyone in or near Minneapolis is crazy enough to relocate and employ a Linux novice who learns quickly for 50K/yr. or better, I'm your guy 8-).
For me personally, I'd rather get a big screen TV and watch the movies at home. The best news I got out of the article is that there is going to be a new muppet movie!
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with you that it would be only slightly more functional. I just like the idea of going to my prefs page and checking off the boxes I would like to read.
To get back to the topic at hand, I just got back from seeing the movie (and the eclipse) an hour ago. I understand some people questioning the need for the "rave" and the love scene, but if human survival depends on people reproducing like happy bunnies, then I guess that's a way to make the point AND appeal to Hollywood's need for formulaic scenes. Of course, if the world they know as Zion is another illusion, then it's still just philosophy.
Apologies for being off topic, but consider this.
Instead of having a point system for comment ratings, what if we had the ability to moderate to type. For example, instead of deducting points for being a troll or being off topic, just moderate (not unlike you do now) as troll, off topic, funny, insughtful, whatever. When a comment receives an acceptable number of moderations to a certain type, it becomes that type.
When you read slashdot with this system, you could then choose to read not by threashold, but by type. The default could be to read everything, or to read by everything except flamebait or troll, or whatever the editors want.
Hey slashdot editors, what do you think?
So we have donor eggs combined with donor sperm to create an embryo. Isn't this the same process used when people with fertility problems (such as low sperm count) go to the clinic for help?
This still brings up the argument that if life begins at conception (natural or lab induced), then you have what will develop into a baby. If this is a persons belief, then harvesting for stem cells is still destruction of life whether or not the embryo was created in a lab.
Definitely "politically icky."
Sorry to fan the flames here, I can't help it 8-)
Before I start picking nits, I want to say that I liked the article, especially the conclusions, or Post-game analysis, as Mr. Barr puts it. However, I need to point out four points in the article that bugged me. After that, I also have to question the premise of the article itself.
1) "Since Microsoft has been in the operating system business for exactly 21 years (DOS 1 debuted August 12, 1981), and employs 50,000 souls, I expected Windows 2000's installation would be seamless, fast, and lightyears ahead of upstart Red Hat's by any measure I could concoct."
While Linux has been around approximately 10 years less than Microsoft by this statement, UNIX has been around much longer. The concepts and commands are well known. In any case, both Linux and Windows have been around long enough, and their features have evolved enough over time that it doesn't really matter any more how long either system has existed.
Also, I think it matters little how many people work for Microsoft. Of those 50,000 souls, it is only a small number that actually work on the development of OS code. I do not know how many people over the years have contributed to the development of the various programs that make up a Linux system, but I don't think this matters, either. There are many dedicated programmers working constantly on the kernel, the GUI, installers, and a host of other pieces of code that make up the entire system.
2) Red Hat, and Linux in general, is not an "upstart" anymore.
I usually expect to see comments like this in the mass media, or technology media specifically. I would hope, though, that at linuxworld.com they would know that Linux is no longer an upstart operating system. It's been around for a decade. It is in use in business all over. It is as much a contender in the server arena as any other system. As a desktop OS for Joe Everyman, I can go along with the Linux as newcomer schtick. But remember, perception is everything in the media. If you want to get over the newcomer image, then you need to start treating the system as if it is common knowledge that it is the best thing to come along since <insert favorite technological advance here>.
3) "The clock was striking high noon as I inserted the first of three Sony System Restore CDs supplied with the laptop. I sat back to see what might happen."
I don't have a Sony laptop, so I am speaking without knowledge here, but in my experience with other computer systems, using the vendor's restore CD is NOT the same thing as installing Windows from Microsoft's media. That seems to make the comparison, as well as rest of this article irrelevant, but I will continue.
4) Windows Update
I agree with Mr. Barr that it is stupid of Microsoft to make the user install so many updates individually. It is still a nice way to apply patches, though. I am thankful for any group who makes automated processes for upgrading and maintaining systems. While I am capable of applying updates individually, or recompiling my kernel, or upgrading apache, or anything else I want to do, I want to spend time using my system, not upgrading or patching it. I remember the annoyance of applying fixpacks to OS/2. Upgrades to Novell NetWare 3.X and 4.X, while simple, were a pain. For Linux, Red Hat has up2date, Mandrake has its Software Manager, Debian as apt-get. (I know there are more, but these are the only ones with which I have some familiarity.) For me, they are all good. They save time. The one trade off to always keep in mind, however, is that it is easy to rely on these automatic updates, even if the latest fixes are not available with them. It goes without saying that this can be insufficient when there are serious security flaws to fix.
A final point.
While I am all for comparing operating systems and the philosophies behind their design, I must question the necessity of comparing things like installation ease and boot times. While I agree that it is good to make the installation of an operating system or an application as easy as possible, after a certain point it should become a non-issue. What matters much more is what work one is able to accomplish with the machine. Unless I am in a lab evaluating a bunch of systems, I don't want to spend my days installing Linux (or Windows, or OS X, or BSD, or anything else). I want to spend my days using the computer to do things. I want to visit web sites, I want to send and receive email and faxes, I want to send and receive instant messages. I want to use my printer, scanner, camera, PDA, etc. I understand that until I can order from Dell or Gateway, or walk into Best Buy, and purchase a system with Linux pre-installed, there will be some need to make the case for easy installation, but let's not focus so much on installer programs that we forget about making the system easy to use.
I take care of a Eudora Worldmail system as part of my duties with my employer. For what it does, it works fine. It has never crashed on me, and handles our small office (60 people) just fine.
My only problem is the whole shared address book thing. I think that is the reason why so many people use MS Exchange with the Outlook client. We have a kludgy solution to that problem, but it is only useable because there are sp few people here.
I wish I had the coding skills to do this - I would like nothing more than to be able to install a Linux system that had a single server application to handle all of the following:
Email, with accounts based on system users and/or custom users.
Multiple shared address books managed on the server. (Accessed with Evolution/Outlook/...)
Group and List management abilities
Shared user/group scheduling
I know there are separate applications to handle many of these things, but one comprehensive package would be nice.
Does anyone know what is out there in the Open Source world to handle the scheduling and the shared address parts of all this? (Unfortunately, I have been a slave to MS for far too long and am only now starting to learn the ways of UNIX. So far, it's quite refreshing.)
Interestingly enough, when I was at Iowa State (graduated Dec. 1994), I think they were still using TeX for thesis papers. It was some time in the mid to late 1990's that they switched to MS Word. It's sad.
dennisp said:
:)
Well I don't know about that. After getting to know a few people online -- who seemed to have very elegant prose -- they seemed like complete nimwits with nothing intelligent to say in person.
I'm not saying that there's something wrong with having time to compose yourself -- but it allows some people to present themselves as things they are not by just doing a couple of quick web searches. You can't exactly put someone on the spot when e-mailing can you?
As to the people appearing to be nimwits in person, that's not so odd. I find that when I take the time to think about something, write my thoughts, and then rewrite them, I am able to express what I am thinking more clearly than when I am in a face to face conversation.
As far as someone looking up stuff on the web, that's OK if they tell you they are quoting something. Also, assuming they are doing good research, they should be commended for actually backing up their statements with some kind of support. (Again, this is assuming that they are doing good research.)
Finally, I think a conversation, or a debate, is better served when both sides are trying to share ideas, not put someone on the spot. For me, email seems to help this.
That's my $0.02. Have fun with it.
So who remembers the "happy helmet" episode of Ren & Stimpy?
I have to agree on the kudos to MediaOne. I'm a subscriber in the Twin Cities, and other than a scheduling snafu to get it installed, it's been great.
I hear ya. I think it's a combination of an inquisitive mind searching for truth and the need for balance.
...
Everyone needs to find a proper balance of physical, mental, spiritual, and social activity, or you just don't feel right. (I'm not a doctor, teacher, priest, or the life of the party, so I can't tell you what amount of each you need.)
The only advice I can give is keep searching and DO NOT GIVE UP.
For me, it's taking the hacker (inquisitive) nature and applying it to life as well as computers.
Doing that has helped me immensely in work, faith, fun, and everything else.
OK, enough brain dump, back to work
The article isn't bad, and is a goog beginning for summing up the history of Linux and presenting it's case for business use, but as I was reading it I had the impression it was talking down to the poor, stupid manager.
As we know, a majority of those put in the suit positions tend to be ignorant of all things technical and highly illogical in their decision making, but they aren't necessarily stupid. (There's a difference, you know.)
The facts are there, but now let's get the diplomacy down. There's no reason we can't use the smooth talk that our "friends" at MS are famous for, especially since we know we have the technical upper hand.
Remember, this aspect of Linux evangelism competes not against another operating system, but with the MS schmoozers who are convincing management that their product is the best thing since canned beer. (Yes, I know bottled is better, and the tap even better than that, but I like the phrase.)
That's my $0.02.
By the way, if anyone in or near Minneapolis is crazy enough to relocate and employ a Linux novice who learns quickly for 50K/yr. or better, I'm your guy 8-).
For me personally, I'd rather get a big screen TV and watch the movies at home. The best news I got out of the article is that there is going to be a new muppet movie!
Ahhhh, childhood memories...