Oh yeah, I agree. All I wanted to address was the complaint that you can't change shells in Windows - technically you can, but from a practical sense and for most people it's a waste of time.
Depends what you mean by hack. Technically the shell is replaced by opening up regedit, going to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon and replacing the Shell entry from explorer.exe to some other executable. I tried it once so that I could launch XBMC smoothly and seamlessly at startup, but then I discovered things like the keyboard volume control buttons didn't work because the volume control which normally appears on the taskbar wasn't running (because there was no taskbar when the shell is replaced), and so it didn't up the keyboard events and hence functionality was lost. So I restored explorer.exe, put XBMC on a 10 second delay before starting and so things worked properly.
So you're right - they do tend to break things, but only in such that they might not provide the functionality you may already be using.
It was more of a curiosity really - I just wanted to see what it was like to run something other than the usual desktop. Lasted for about a day, not because it was necessarily unstable or lacking in a great deal of functionality, but simply because it didn't offer many advantages that would balance the disadvantages from running something completely different to all other Windows desktops at the time. That's been my only real experience with replacement shells, apart from the fact I know it can be done, which is all I was addressing.
Maybe Microsoft should offer similar flexibility with Windows.
But... they do. You can replace the shell (by default explorer.exe) with whatever shell you want via a simple registry change - there are several third-party shells out there. Of course they aren't as popular as Explorer, but then again I feel the default Windows shell is extremely flexible and has far fewer issues with it compared to most Linux DEs such that most people don't feel the the need to have to change shells in the first place. Every single DE I've tried in Linux has some issue that isn't present in another DE, even though that alternative DE has issues not present in the first. Windows 7 seems to have made enough sensible decisions and allow enough flexibility as part of its shipped shell so that this isn't an issue.
That's a scarecrow argument dude and I'm bringing my flying monkeys to tear the straw out of that man. We're talkin' sys admin's, not your know-nuttin home customers. Linux & BSD's all come with whatever desktop environment you wish for. If Micro$oft doesn't give the IT dept's a Win8 interface that IT wants, then IT will go elsewhere & the whole *nix world is ready & willing. It's really that simple.
No they fucking won't. Why haven't you guys learnt anything from history?
If Windows 8 sucks, then IT will stick with Windows 7, just like they stuck with Vista when XP sucked. There's absolutely no motivation to move to Linux when it requires basically ditching all their software, rebuilding the backend (servers, an alternative for exchange, etc) from scratch and starting again. That would cost more than, well, sticking with what works until such time that a better version of Windows appears.
Unfortunately, this year is the year the Linux desktop imploded, thanks to Gnome 3 and Unity.
The funny/sad thing about GNOME 3 and Unity is that they exist because their respective developers actually seem to believe that the design decisions made in each DE are what's needed for mainstream success. By making each environment rather crappy and counter-productive and inflexible, it's pushed me away from bothering with Linux if this is the direction that Linux figureheads want to take thing. It is therefore unfortunate Microsoft have gone insane too, but at least Windows 7 will be around for a very long time.
Secure boot isn't meant to kill off linux. It's meant to kill off XP
Nope.avi
It's not the official reason, and it's barely mentioned in the press by anyone but the REAL reason seems clear to me - Secure Boot will prevent the ability to use modified bootloaders which are the basis for the most effective activation bypasses out there for Windows Vista/7. These activation bypassers are not cracks as such because they don't replace any system files with hacked versions, and as such do not get detected with the occasional Windows Update specifically designed to detect the presence of modified system files normally messed with by the more primitive methods of bypassing activation.
If Secure Boot becomes widespread (and if it's not easy/impossible to disable), then these bypassers will be harder to craft for Windows 8. I have no doubt something will eventuate to take their place but it should prolong the length of time that Microsoft has the upper hand.
Having said that, Windows 8 looks like total shit for desktop/laptop users so I don't see much of a demand for activation bypassers in the short term anyway. At least in my case.:)
Unless it's an amazing level of burn that everyone can agree was awesome, it's not worth it. If someone wants to be a dick, you aren't required to retaliate in kind. At best you can ignore them.
We'll get our chance to ridicule Mac users when Apple does something stupid with OS X.
It's shit like this, the high level of Schadenfreude present on the Internet when it comes to technology, that almost makes me not want to bother with forums anymore. Seriously, it's amazing how people in the Linux community cannot help themselves but enjoy it when users of Windows/OSX run into issues. As if Linux doesn't have its own wide set of problems anyway. I don't ridicule a Linux user who suffers breakage after an update, so why ridicule me personally if something fucks up in Windows?
Fucking fanboys and stupid fucking kids (or adults with childish brains) sap all the fun out of discussion boards.
Perhaps, but as far as what media and marketing use when they want to use a picture of a smartphone, they'll use an iPhone. It's also safe money that if you pick a random group of smartphone users, at least half will have an iPhone. I say this as a (reasonably) happy Galaxy S2 user. I think I've seen one person so far use a WM7 phone.
Because iPad is dominating tablet market, a market that's growing 330% per year and is set to sell more units than traditional PCs by 2015. So everything will be compared to iPad.
Like I said, it's obvious that it will be compared to the iPad (hardly a crime to do so). But the idea that they have to topple the product (i.e. become an iPad-killer) and if they don't then they're not worth being fabrication in the first place, seems to be very short-sighted to me. As if they can't carve out their own market with those who aren't satisfied with what the iPad offers.
The Transformer's tablet component is definitely no iPad-killer.
What's this obsession in the media with regards to consumer tech (phones, tablets, portable music players) in which products different to the current market leader are qualified as to whether or not that are a -killer? In the case of tablets, the iPad has its strength and weaknesses, and although it seems like a good all-round device it's not for everyone. Some people want more ports, more expandability, something a bit more like a portable computer than a portable appliance (which the iPad is marketed as). In this case it doesn't need to "kill" the market leader - it just has to offer something different that people want. In this way, we have choice.
Now of course it will be compared to the iPad, but what's this obsession that if you're not the market leader, you're not worth buying? If that were the case there'd be no market for Android phones, or even WM7 phones. Is there perhaps some deep-seated personal feeling that if you don't buy number one, you're by extension not a winner and instead a second-class individual? Or is it just the apps?
Now, let's just get that Linux port finished already okay
It's absolutely amazing how many people want to bring a DRM platform to Linux. I know Steam is very popular but it also encourages people to give the keys to access your games with a 3rd-party, and not keep the control with yourself. If something happens to your account/Valve, you're fucked. We should be encouraging places like non-DRM sellers like GOG to have Linux games officially available, as well as encourage things like the Humble Bundles when available. This infatuation with Steam will simply push acceptance of "permanent rental" with the younger generation.
Note: I'm not a freetard - I dislike Richard Stallman, but I don't like where the lack of control over the things we buy is going. That fuckhead at Phoronix is OBSESSED with Steam for Linux - as if it will fix everything for Linux on the desktop.
You are a rare exception my friend. Having said that, I also enjoy my work, but I'm not naive or clueless enough to think it's particularly common to do so, so I don't boast about it.
Take a fresh install of Windows 7, install the NVIDIA drivers and let it finish. You'll be asked to reboot before they'll work.
Take an existing install of Windows 7 with the NVIDIA drivers already installed, install a newer set of drivers and let it finish. You'll be able to use the new drivers without a reboot.
In other words, stop being a fucking smart-ass - you don't know everything.
NVidia's message is clearly "linux users are second zone citizens and we will not help them the slightest".
This, right here, is the real reason I think that people ignore Linux on the desktop: No-one likes being treated as a second-class individual. Considering yourself to an operating system/distro that has such few users that you are continually passed over in terms of quality commercial software, fully-functional hardware and all the perks that these two elements provide, then the frustration can be enough to say "fuck it" and move back to Windows or even OS X.
Experienced, determined and stubborn Linux users are used to it and although frustrating, it's generally not enough to deter them from continuing to use something that very few vendors take seriously on the desktop at least. But most people can't handle that lack of support, and although elated at finding something like Ubuntu, if they start to actually use the system for a while and plug in new devices, look for software to do a particular job and they find it non-existent or substandard in Linux, the novelty will wear thin. And all because of companies like NVidia and others treating Linux users as second-class folks.
Until this attitude with vendors changes, nothing else will.
Q was entertaining, but he made a terrible villain.
Q wasn't a villain. In fact I wouldn't consider Q to ever have been anything close to a villain. A villain would be out to cause serious harm to Picard and the Enterprise without benefit to anyone apart from said villain. Q's interest was in helping Picard learn to expand his knowledge and bounds through adversity. He wanted to test Picard, to see if he was capable of higher thinking - it's just that his style of... "teaching" was perhaps more perilous than most would have expected. He didn't play it soft with the situations he forced Picard/his crew to endure because he knew the only way to learn would be through experiences, of which many (e.g. the Borg, Picard's death, the prevention of human cells or something forming in the first place) were of significantly high stakes.
God you're arrogant. I work at a facility in which WiFi is banned due to it being a security risk (it's a Defence workplace). However we are allowed to use these special encrypted USB keys. iPads are out of the question (unless we use an adapter of some sort of course), but a tablet with a USB slot already built in would be more ideal.
Plenty of people use USB keys still; heck if I want to move files from one device to another it's guaranteed to work so long as the ports exist. I wasn't aware that people have to always be on the forefront of technology in order to do anything. Maybe I should throw out my netbook because it's no longer relevant apparently.
It is like hollywood movies, the market are 14~15 year old boys. So movies are made that target them.
Interesting then that some of the most popular and violent games with increasingly detailed violent acts (courtesy of cinematic technologies present in many modern games) are being deliberately targeted towards an age group that is not legally (at least in the US) allowed to be sold the games in the first place. Of course their clueless parents will buy it for them anyway, it's just funny nonetheless.
Slashdot Mirror
What, like Game of Thrones?
Oh yeah, I agree. All I wanted to address was the complaint that you can't change shells in Windows - technically you can, but from a practical sense and for most people it's a waste of time.
Depends what you mean by hack. Technically the shell is replaced by opening up regedit, going to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon and replacing the Shell entry from explorer.exe to some other executable. I tried it once so that I could launch XBMC smoothly and seamlessly at startup, but then I discovered things like the keyboard volume control buttons didn't work because the volume control which normally appears on the taskbar wasn't running (because there was no taskbar when the shell is replaced), and so it didn't up the keyboard events and hence functionality was lost. So I restored explorer.exe, put XBMC on a 10 second delay before starting and so things worked properly.
So you're right - they do tend to break things, but only in such that they might not provide the functionality you may already be using.
A very long time (9-10 years) I ran on XP what I believe was this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiteStep
It was more of a curiosity really - I just wanted to see what it was like to run something other than the usual desktop. Lasted for about a day, not because it was necessarily unstable or lacking in a great deal of functionality, but simply because it didn't offer many advantages that would balance the disadvantages from running something completely different to all other Windows desktops at the time. That's been my only real experience with replacement shells, apart from the fact I know it can be done, which is all I was addressing.
Ya think? I would have thought the phrase "a quality game like Call of Duty " would have been a dead giveaway.
But... they do. You can replace the shell (by default explorer.exe) with whatever shell you want via a simple registry change - there are several third-party shells out there. Of course they aren't as popular as Explorer, but then again I feel the default Windows shell is extremely flexible and has far fewer issues with it compared to most Linux DEs such that most people don't feel the the need to have to change shells in the first place. Every single DE I've tried in Linux has some issue that isn't present in another DE, even though that alternative DE has issues not present in the first. Windows 7 seems to have made enough sensible decisions and allow enough flexibility as part of its shipped shell so that this isn't an issue.
Oh God. I just realized why Slashdot needs to give us the ability to edit out posts...
"I don't always post on Slashdot, but when I do, I fuck it up."
No they fucking won't. Why haven't you guys learnt anything from history?
If Windows 8 sucks, then IT will stick with Windows 7, just like they stuck with Vista when XP sucked. There's absolutely no motivation to move to Linux when it requires basically ditching all their software, rebuilding the backend (servers, an alternative for exchange, etc) from scratch and starting again. That would cost more than, well, sticking with what works until such time that a better version of Windows appears.
The funny/sad thing about GNOME 3 and Unity is that they exist because their respective developers actually seem to believe that the design decisions made in each DE are what's needed for mainstream success. By making each environment rather crappy and counter-productive and inflexible, it's pushed me away from bothering with Linux if this is the direction that Linux figureheads want to take thing. It is therefore unfortunate Microsoft have gone insane too, but at least Windows 7 will be around for a very long time.
Nope.avi
It's not the official reason, and it's barely mentioned in the press by anyone but the REAL reason seems clear to me - Secure Boot will prevent the ability to use modified bootloaders which are the basis for the most effective activation bypasses out there for Windows Vista/7. These activation bypassers are not cracks as such because they don't replace any system files with hacked versions, and as such do not get detected with the occasional Windows Update specifically designed to detect the presence of modified system files normally messed with by the more primitive methods of bypassing activation.
If Secure Boot becomes widespread (and if it's not easy/impossible to disable), then these bypassers will be harder to craft for Windows 8. I have no doubt something will eventuate to take their place but it should prolong the length of time that Microsoft has the upper hand.
Having said that, Windows 8 looks like total shit for desktop/laptop users so I don't see much of a demand for activation bypassers in the short term anyway. At least in my case. :)
Unless it's an amazing level of burn that everyone can agree was awesome, it's not worth it. If someone wants to be a dick, you aren't required to retaliate in kind. At best you can ignore them.
It's shit like this, the high level of Schadenfreude present on the Internet when it comes to technology, that almost makes me not want to bother with forums anymore. Seriously, it's amazing how people in the Linux community cannot help themselves but enjoy it when users of Windows/OSX run into issues. As if Linux doesn't have its own wide set of problems anyway. I don't ridicule a Linux user who suffers breakage after an update, so why ridicule me personally if something fucks up in Windows?
Fucking fanboys and stupid fucking kids (or adults with childish brains) sap all the fun out of discussion boards.
This reference could only be made due to the recent Humble Bundle...
Perhaps, but as far as what media and marketing use when they want to use a picture of a smartphone, they'll use an iPhone. It's also safe money that if you pick a random group of smartphone users, at least half will have an iPhone. I say this as a (reasonably) happy Galaxy S2 user. I think I've seen one person so far use a WM7 phone.
Like I said, it's obvious that it will be compared to the iPad (hardly a crime to do so). But the idea that they have to topple the product (i.e. become an iPad-killer) and if they don't then they're not worth being fabrication in the first place, seems to be very short-sighted to me. As if they can't carve out their own market with those who aren't satisfied with what the iPad offers.
What's this obsession in the media with regards to consumer tech (phones, tablets, portable music players) in which products different to the current market leader are qualified as to whether or not that are a -killer? In the case of tablets, the iPad has its strength and weaknesses, and although it seems like a good all-round device it's not for everyone. Some people want more ports, more expandability, something a bit more like a portable computer than a portable appliance (which the iPad is marketed as). In this case it doesn't need to "kill" the market leader - it just has to offer something different that people want. In this way, we have choice.
Now of course it will be compared to the iPad, but what's this obsession that if you're not the market leader, you're not worth buying? If that were the case there'd be no market for Android phones, or even WM7 phones. Is there perhaps some deep-seated personal feeling that if you don't buy number one, you're by extension not a winner and instead a second-class individual? Or is it just the apps?
It's absolutely amazing how many people want to bring a DRM platform to Linux. I know Steam is very popular but it also encourages people to give the keys to access your games with a 3rd-party, and not keep the control with yourself. If something happens to your account/Valve, you're fucked. We should be encouraging places like non-DRM sellers like GOG to have Linux games officially available, as well as encourage things like the Humble Bundles when available. This infatuation with Steam will simply push acceptance of "permanent rental" with the younger generation.
Note: I'm not a freetard - I dislike Richard Stallman, but I don't like where the lack of control over the things we buy is going. That fuckhead at Phoronix is OBSESSED with Steam for Linux - as if it will fix everything for Linux on the desktop.
So what? Q's fun. The bible's not.
You are a rare exception my friend. Having said that, I also enjoy my work, but I'm not naive or clueless enough to think it's particularly common to do so, so I don't boast about it.
Take a fresh install of Windows 7, install the NVIDIA drivers and let it finish. You'll be asked to reboot before they'll work.
Take an existing install of Windows 7 with the NVIDIA drivers already installed, install a newer set of drivers and let it finish. You'll be able to use the new drivers without a reboot.
In other words, stop being a fucking smart-ass - you don't know everything.
This, right here, is the real reason I think that people ignore Linux on the desktop: No-one likes being treated as a second-class individual. Considering yourself to an operating system/distro that has such few users that you are continually passed over in terms of quality commercial software, fully-functional hardware and all the perks that these two elements provide, then the frustration can be enough to say "fuck it" and move back to Windows or even OS X.
Experienced, determined and stubborn Linux users are used to it and although frustrating, it's generally not enough to deter them from continuing to use something that very few vendors take seriously on the desktop at least. But most people can't handle that lack of support, and although elated at finding something like Ubuntu, if they start to actually use the system for a while and plug in new devices, look for software to do a particular job and they find it non-existent or substandard in Linux, the novelty will wear thin. And all because of companies like NVidia and others treating Linux users as second-class folks.
Until this attitude with vendors changes, nothing else will.
Q wasn't a villain. In fact I wouldn't consider Q to ever have been anything close to a villain. A villain would be out to cause serious harm to Picard and the Enterprise without benefit to anyone apart from said villain. Q's interest was in helping Picard learn to expand his knowledge and bounds through adversity. He wanted to test Picard, to see if he was capable of higher thinking - it's just that his style of... "teaching" was perhaps more perilous than most would have expected. He didn't play it soft with the situations he forced Picard/his crew to endure because he knew the only way to learn would be through experiences, of which many (e.g. the Borg, Picard's death, the prevention of human cells or something forming in the first place) were of significantly high stakes.
Are you deliberately trying to sabotage your social and sex life?
God you're arrogant. I work at a facility in which WiFi is banned due to it being a security risk (it's a Defence workplace). However we are allowed to use these special encrypted USB keys. iPads are out of the question (unless we use an adapter of some sort of course), but a tablet with a USB slot already built in would be more ideal.
Plenty of people use USB keys still; heck if I want to move files from one device to another it's guaranteed to work so long as the ports exist. I wasn't aware that people have to always be on the forefront of technology in order to do anything. Maybe I should throw out my netbook because it's no longer relevant apparently.
Interesting then that some of the most popular and violent games with increasingly detailed violent acts (courtesy of cinematic technologies present in many modern games) are being deliberately targeted towards an age group that is not legally (at least in the US) allowed to be sold the games in the first place. Of course their clueless parents will buy it for them anyway, it's just funny nonetheless.