The difference being that Android is Google's project and KHTML is KDE's...
Bad comparison. The majority of Android was not developed by Google or Android before being acquired. Dalvik is the main from-scratch component, then there is the (fairly mundane) window manager, and most of the rest was assembling components.
Huh? Google was supposed to release source code for Android? Pretty sure that counts as extra.
Nope, sorry, it's pretty much an obligation considering where Google got most of that code, never mind most of the code that currently earns them billions of dollars. To put it in perspective, think about the large amount of self inflicted damage Google would sustain if it declared today that Android would henceforth be entirely closed like meOS.
Anything: here's my thankyou. Not a really, really big thankyou because some of the posturing that went on in the leadup was just plain annoying. But thankyou all the same.
I can assure you that the second mePad sucks too. I find my Xoom usable, the mePad 2 makes me feel like breaking the thing in half about once every minute while using it. Lag issues particularly, which don't occur on the Xoom.
I find browsing the web on an iPad to be intensely aggravating. A combination of pathetic text entry, wrong sized buttons and fields, and frequent horrible lag up to a minute for no apparent reason.
Your definition of easy is different from mine then. I found just booting Windows for the first time to be quite painful with all the reboots and weird, not quite successful attempts to reboot to the same state.
Nothing like being stuck with an Windows machine in a far away place that can't be reinstalled, and needs to be. It was because of experience like that I left Windows for good, which has worked out just fine for me. I'm not the only one, a neighbor recently told me about not being able to reinstall Windows on a laptop overseas because the keyboard had been replaced.
My current laptop is a Dell core 2 inspirion, a nice generic laptop, however Dell seems to have ended its Linux preinstall program. The nice thing about Dell was the price. If I needed a new laptop today I might get one of these: linuxcertified.com
No doubt we're seeing the effects of an active, successful, and most probably illegal campaign by Microsoft to drive a wedge between Canonical and the PC vendors. So the Right Thing to Do is send your money to specialty vendors like above who Microsoft can't push around.
The Gnome polish that Ubuntu introduced went a long way as well, including things like a working network manager that dealt well with wireless connection
Having a network manager that shuts down when the GUI shuts down is an incredibly bad idea. Furthermore, while NetworkManager works pretty well in some specific situations, it tends to turn into a major source of weird breakage whenever it encounters even slightly unusual topology.
I would say there is more than sufficient reason for a tear-up and replace of NetworkManager, which should obviously not be tied to the desktop. (Tied to and controlled by are two very different things.)
Windows works out of the box on brand new PCs because their manufacturers work with Microsoft on drivers and setup. Better than that, it comes preinstalled. No user setup at all. Canonical has to do the same if they want to reach their ambitious goals.
Canonical does do the same, I'm typing on one of those right now.
Microsoft actually listened to it's users and fixed up a list of issues with Vista to make 7.
I installed a Windows 7 Home Premium machine for my mother last week and it sucks beyond belief. She hates it, never mind me. Top on her hate list: where are the menus? Aren't they supposed to be where that blurry ugly thing is now?
Not having a normal email program installed by default really stretches my "what the?" factor.
I think the (possibly delusional) people at Canonical have the idea that they're going to get equipment makers to include their distro pre-installed on devices, the way MacOS and Windows are today. They tried this with Dell IIRC, and that didn't work out so well.
I have two Dell machines here with Linux pre-installed that say you're wrong. Mind you, I upgraded both of them to stock Ubuntu after a while, which is more current. The thing is, those machines came to me fully functional, I was up and running in (much) less than 5 minutes out of the box. Then it's easy to look at what hardware drivers are in use and ensure that the same support is available in stock distributions. Which famously was not the case with Dell - it was a couple years before the embedded Wifi got a proper open source driver in the upstream kernel. I waited, big deal.
I would buy from Dell again. Yes, you get some way too cheap hardware that fails but that is just a fact of life in the consumer world. To their credit, Dell sends out replacement parts really without excessive procedure.
Actually, I can really, really recommend these guys: Endpcnoise.com. Excellent silent workstations running Ubuntu at a decent price. The only component I can hear in my 4 way Phenom is the hard disk, and not for very much longer.
That is the tradeoff, in a nutshell. For most people, who don't want to dick around with the internals of their PC to get it working, Windows 7, and even moreso Mac, is the right choice.
Your attitude is stuck in a timewarp. Try installing Windows from scratch, or MacOS (if that is even possible). On the other hand, if you get Linux pre-installed like I did on at least a half dozen machines, it just works without fiddling.
Installing Linux from scratch is actually faster with less headaches that setting up preinstalled Windows, which I can say with confidence because I have done both in the last week. Windows likes to reboot a lot. Even after its installed. Frankly, I find it just painful and don't know why anybody puts up with it. Let alone the offensive license regimen and DRM-related fragility.
BTW, the majority of major distros have chosen rpm-based systems
Distrowatch says you're wrong. Debian based distros occupy 3 of the top five slots while Fedora as slipped to number 3. Incidentally, redhat while being the most profitable, is far from most popular at number 24.
Ask the rpm camp if they think their tools are so bad...(BTW, the majority of major distros have chosen rpm-based systems).
Confirmed rpm lovers even like the redhat network configuration style - just run a script file, after all you can do anything that way! There is no accounting for bad taste.
...their labor are then sucked by the Ubuntu parasites...
That's not the way (most) people think about Ubuntu inside the Debian community.
I think of Ubuntu as advertising for Debian. Eventually, everybody figures out where you need to go to get the real thing, though not everybody bothers to go there. After all, Ubuntu is great compared to Windows or Real Unix[tm]
because it parallelizes startup and daemons have no way to report back to systemd that they are fully started and ready to accept requests, it's possible that a service will finish start up before one that it requires is ready.
All such parallel startup schemes have a way of expressing startup dependencies such that prerequisite services are available before a dependent service starts. Systemd just goes about it in an inelegant, bug prone way. It can apparently be made to work...
Debian sid fubar'd on me plenty of times (mostly revolving around Nvidia's proprietary driver and the kernel modules for it...), but testing has not broken even once for me.
Sid breaks regularly, that is because Sid users are de facto members of the QA team. But I have never failed to fix it manually, usually just with a forced file overwrite or similar. When it breaks it is almost always something you don't really care about and can just remove and reinstall. Debian guys seemed to like leaving KDE uninstallable for months at a time in Sid but that seems to be a thing of the past. For my workstation I prefer Sid even with the extra excitement, it keeps everything fresh and shiny. When major changes do arrive they are usually well justified and handled with taste.
It does happen. People have researched this. It's a fact, but the Debian social club needs to live in denial.
Citation please.
In 12 years of using Debian apt+dpkg heavily, it has been wonderful. I have a server still in use that started as Potato more than a decade ago and has been upgraded all the way through to Wheezy. I just copy the disk at each hardware upgrade and resize it. Twice in all this time I have had to reinstall a machine, both corporate machines conceived in bad taste (Goobuntu is basically Ubuntu, slightly mangled).
Apple also only contributes to projects under licenses that bless proprietary forks. While there is nothing wrong with this, there is something wrong if such contributions amount to an attack on established copyleft projects. For example, webkit vs Gecko. LLVM vs GCC. Google does this too, intentionally wielding Apache license projects to weaken GPL projects. Worth meditating on the probability that "don't be evil" really means "unless it suits us". However. There is still a huge amount of value in contributions from both sources. Furthermore, a copyleft projects has the advantage of being able to promote code under a completely permissive license like BSD to copyleft by adding GPL-licensed improvements. However, the biggest factor keeping copyleft projects vibrant is that programmers tend to prefer copyleft to avoid having their free contributions vanish into privatized obscurity.
It's funny they had to fix it by copying the method from Windows though.
The issue is that essential documentation is kept secret from the public, shared by vendors only with Microsoft, most probably due to licensing/pricing pressure from Microsoft. Smells like yet another antitrust time bomb to me.
Time-To-Live? Yeah that makes a lot of sense! Although that feature was co-opted to eventually become a "hop-limit" just like is in IPv6 now, but there were some really other dumb things that weren't thought through for IPv4 that were fixed in IPv6 (*cough* QoS).
You need a better example than TTL, which as you note was fixed without fuss and without breaking IPv4 compatibility. You are far from proving your case that the baby needed to be thrown out with the bathwater as the IPv6 committee wantonly did.
Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla foundation would be wise to drop Gecko in favor of Webkit, and then GPL Webkit as, say, um "Gecko 2".
The difference being that Android is Google's project and KHTML is KDE's...
Bad comparison. The majority of Android was not developed by Google or Android before being acquired. Dalvik is the main from-scratch component, then there is the (fairly mundane) window manager, and most of the rest was assembling components.
No, it doesn't. They're supposed to release it. They had an excuse for Honeycomb, but that's all it was: An excuse.
Yes, but it was a sufficient excuse. They didn't want to, and were under no obligation to do so.
Google took a pretty big PR hit over that. Macheads had a field day with it.
Huh? Google was supposed to release source code for Android? Pretty sure that counts as extra.
Nope, sorry, it's pretty much an obligation considering where Google got most of that code, never mind most of the code that currently earns them billions of dollars. To put it in perspective, think about the large amount of self inflicted damage Google would sustain if it declared today that Android would henceforth be entirely closed like meOS.
Anything: here's my thankyou. Not a really, really big thankyou because some of the posturing that went on in the leadup was just plain annoying. But thankyou all the same.
I can assure you that the second mePad sucks too. I find my Xoom usable, the mePad 2 makes me feel like breaking the thing in half about once every minute while using it. Lag issues particularly, which don't occur on the Xoom.
The most embarrassing part is that, like many Android devices, the Fire can't scroll smoothly despite having a dual core processor...
Wishful thinking, what? I have two Android tablets here, a G2 and Xoom and they both scroll silky smoothly.
For me it's more about Apple's products sucking. Of course, Apple has also done a great job of encourage distaste.
I find browsing the web on an iPad to be intensely aggravating. A combination of pathetic text entry, wrong sized buttons and fields, and frequent horrible lag up to a minute for no apparent reason.
Your definition of easy is different from mine then. I found just booting Windows for the first time to be quite painful with all the reboots and weird, not quite successful attempts to reboot to the same state.
DRM related fragility: Genuine_Advantage False_positive_rate.
Nothing like being stuck with an Windows machine in a far away place that can't be reinstalled, and needs to be. It was because of experience like that I left Windows for good, which has worked out just fine for me. I'm not the only one, a neighbor recently told me about not being able to reinstall Windows on a laptop overseas because the keyboard had been replaced.
Quietized workstation: endpcnoise.com
My current laptop is a Dell core 2 inspirion, a nice generic laptop, however Dell seems to have ended its Linux preinstall program. The nice thing about Dell was the price. If I needed a new laptop today I might get one of these: linuxcertified.com
No doubt we're seeing the effects of an active, successful, and most probably illegal campaign by Microsoft to drive a wedge between Canonical and the PC vendors. So the Right Thing to Do is send your money to specialty vendors like above who Microsoft can't push around.
The Gnome polish that Ubuntu introduced went a long way as well, including things like a working network manager that dealt well with wireless connection
Having a network manager that shuts down when the GUI shuts down is an incredibly bad idea. Furthermore, while NetworkManager works pretty well in some specific situations, it tends to turn into a major source of weird breakage whenever it encounters even slightly unusual topology.
I would say there is more than sufficient reason for a tear-up and replace of NetworkManager, which should obviously not be tied to the desktop. (Tied to and controlled by are two very different things.)
Sid is almost ALWAYS newer than Ubuntu.
By definition, because each Ubuntu release is derived from Sid.
Windows works out of the box on brand new PCs because their manufacturers work with Microsoft on drivers and setup. Better than that, it comes preinstalled. No user setup at all. Canonical has to do the same if they want to reach their ambitious goals.
Canonical does do the same, I'm typing on one of those right now.
Microsoft actually listened to it's users and fixed up a list of issues with Vista to make 7.
I installed a Windows 7 Home Premium machine for my mother last week and it sucks beyond belief. She hates it, never mind me. Top on her hate list: where are the menus? Aren't they supposed to be where that blurry ugly thing is now?
Not having a normal email program installed by default really stretches my "what the?" factor.
I think the (possibly delusional) people at Canonical have the idea that they're going to get equipment makers to include their distro pre-installed on devices, the way MacOS and Windows are today. They tried this with Dell IIRC, and that didn't work out so well.
I have two Dell machines here with Linux pre-installed that say you're wrong. Mind you, I upgraded both of them to stock Ubuntu after a while, which is more current. The thing is, those machines came to me fully functional, I was up and running in (much) less than 5 minutes out of the box. Then it's easy to look at what hardware drivers are in use and ensure that the same support is available in stock distributions. Which famously was not the case with Dell - it was a couple years before the embedded Wifi got a proper open source driver in the upstream kernel. I waited, big deal.
I would buy from Dell again. Yes, you get some way too cheap hardware that fails but that is just a fact of life in the consumer world. To their credit, Dell sends out replacement parts really without excessive procedure.
Actually, I can really, really recommend these guys: Endpcnoise.com. Excellent silent workstations running Ubuntu at a decent price. The only component I can hear in my 4 way Phenom is the hard disk, and not for very much longer.
That is the tradeoff, in a nutshell. For most people, who don't want to dick around with the internals of their PC to get it working, Windows 7, and even moreso Mac, is the right choice.
Your attitude is stuck in a timewarp. Try installing Windows from scratch, or MacOS (if that is even possible). On the other hand, if you get Linux pre-installed like I did on at least a half dozen machines, it just works without fiddling.
Installing Linux from scratch is actually faster with less headaches that setting up preinstalled Windows, which I can say with confidence because I have done both in the last week. Windows likes to reboot a lot. Even after its installed. Frankly, I find it just painful and don't know why anybody puts up with it. Let alone the offensive license regimen and DRM-related fragility.
BTW, the majority of major distros have chosen rpm-based systems
Distrowatch says you're wrong. Debian based distros occupy 3 of the top five slots while Fedora as slipped to number 3. Incidentally, redhat while being the most profitable, is far from most popular at number 24.
Ask the rpm camp if they think their tools are so bad...(BTW, the majority of major distros have chosen rpm-based systems).
Confirmed rpm lovers even like the redhat network configuration style - just run a script file, after all you can do anything that way! There is no accounting for bad taste.
...their labor are then sucked by the Ubuntu parasites...
That's not the way (most) people think about Ubuntu inside the Debian community.
I think of Ubuntu as advertising for Debian. Eventually, everybody figures out where you need to go to get the real thing, though not everybody bothers to go there. After all, Ubuntu is great compared to Windows or Real Unix[tm]
because it parallelizes startup and daemons have no way to report back to systemd that they are fully started and ready to accept requests, it's possible that a service will finish start up before one that it requires is ready.
All such parallel startup schemes have a way of expressing startup dependencies such that prerequisite services are available before a dependent service starts. Systemd just goes about it in an inelegant, bug prone way. It can apparently be made to work...
Debian sid fubar'd on me plenty of times (mostly revolving around Nvidia's proprietary driver and the kernel modules for it...), but testing has not broken even once for me.
Sid breaks regularly, that is because Sid users are de facto members of the QA team. But I have never failed to fix it manually, usually just with a forced file overwrite or similar. When it breaks it is almost always something you don't really care about and can just remove and reinstall. Debian guys seemed to like leaving KDE uninstallable for months at a time in Sid but that seems to be a thing of the past. For my workstation I prefer Sid even with the extra excitement, it keeps everything fresh and shiny. When major changes do arrive they are usually well justified and handled with taste.
It does happen. People have researched this. It's a fact, but the Debian social club needs to live in denial.
Citation please.
In 12 years of using Debian apt+dpkg heavily, it has been wonderful. I have a server still in use that started as Potato more than a decade ago and has been upgraded all the way through to Wheezy. I just copy the disk at each hardware upgrade and resize it. Twice in all this time I have had to reinstall a machine, both corporate machines conceived in bad taste (Goobuntu is basically Ubuntu, slightly mangled).
Apple also only contributes to projects under licenses that bless proprietary forks. While there is nothing wrong with this, there is something wrong if such contributions amount to an attack on established copyleft projects. For example, webkit vs Gecko. LLVM vs GCC. Google does this too, intentionally wielding Apache license projects to weaken GPL projects. Worth meditating on the probability that "don't be evil" really means "unless it suits us". However. There is still a huge amount of value in contributions from both sources. Furthermore, a copyleft projects has the advantage of being able to promote code under a completely permissive license like BSD to copyleft by adding GPL-licensed improvements. However, the biggest factor keeping copyleft projects vibrant is that programmers tend to prefer copyleft to avoid having their free contributions vanish into privatized obscurity.
It's funny they had to fix it by copying the method from Windows though.
The issue is that essential documentation is kept secret from the public, shared by vendors only with Microsoft, most probably due to licensing/pricing pressure from Microsoft. Smells like yet another antitrust time bomb to me.
Time-To-Live? Yeah that makes a lot of sense! Although that feature was co-opted to eventually become a "hop-limit" just like is in IPv6 now, but there were some really other dumb things that weren't thought through for IPv4 that were fixed in IPv6 (*cough* QoS).
You need a better example than TTL, which as you note was fixed without fuss and without breaking IPv4 compatibility. You are far from proving your case that the baby needed to be thrown out with the bathwater as the IPv6 committee wantonly did.