it is very different. some people prefer gnome2 over gnome3, just like some people prefer kde or e17 or xfce or xmonad. it would be odd for a distro to say we are removing gnome, you will use e17 now. (you can't parallel install gnome2 and gnome3, or easily have them both in the same distro).
it has higher system requirements. on my netbook i could no longer use an external display, because my GPU did not support large enough openGL textures. with gnome2 it was fine. llvmpipe may be a solution now, but i can't imagine the performance is good on a 32bit atom.
it has new bugs. gnome3 used to crash a lot for me. sometimes the only way to get it to log back in after was to delete the config file. i assume its better in 3.8, but i am happy with mate these days.
i think a good analogy is to image that the kernel developers removed ext4 now that they have btrfs. they could argue that btrfs has lots of new features, and that you would be stupid to want to use an old deadend file system that did not even have data checksumming and snapshots. that would go down well. (i use btrfs:-) )
dear gnome 2 users. here is gnome 3.0. we have changed everything, and it wont run on you 3 year old laptop any more. hope you like it because it will be really hard to keep using gnome2 while keeping up to date with other packages.if you don't like it please just wait a few years and we'll bring back some of the old features as a classic mode. hey, where have you all gone?
Its pretty much impossible to install gnome2 and gnome3 on the same system, or have them both in the same repo (unlike plenty of other similar sized projects what you can have multiple versions installed (KDE3 and 4, as many GCC, python and kernel versions as you want)) https://lwn.net/Articles/466872/
mate solved this difficult technical problem, mostly by doing 's/gnome/mate/g' (since then they have modernised the code, removed most of the deprecated libraries, and added useful features)
Does the US constitution make the US more or less free? It guarantee some freedoms, but it also removes your right to remove those freedoms and so could be seen as restrictive.
it takes a lot of words to keep the code free (which for some developers is a priority). GPL2 is fairly short, GPL3 works a bit harder to avoid loop holes that nobody though of in the 1980s.
I am sure most of those 1.7 million projects have no aspiration to become a real software project. do they have a website, mailing list/forum, releases, users? or are they just random little scripts, snippits and exercises, just put on line for the education of others?
For a large piece of coding i might care about getting bug fixes back. for the script i use to sort my digital photos in to folders based on the date in their exif, and is 50% lines pasted from documentation or stack exchange, i don't care. if you want to know which licences are used for serious projects then grab the top hundred or thousand from ohloh and check them.
ok. there are probably inaccuracies here (i am not an x developer, the video presenter is), but these seem like the import and points from the video Large amounts of X11 are irrelevant now. Most of the drawing code is unused now. the ui tool kit libraries draw to a bit map and send that to the screen. Lots of the code for dealing with hardware and power management is now in the kernel. X11 has I/O port management, PCI bus management, binary loaders, BIOS emulation, its basically an OS. It has accumulates multiple input, display management and buffer stacks. Most people use a composited window manager, so actually the WM draws the whole display, and sends everything as a single bitmap. Most drawing does not even really use X, it uses DRI to talk directly to the hardware. This has all been achieved by piling extensions on to X11, so as to keep the core protocol unchanged Its very hard to make everything frame perfect in X11. when a window is resized X draws mess before the client has a chance to redraw. its very hard to avoid flicker and tearing.
Imagine if HTML5 had never removed anything, and so had thousands of tags that all web browsers had to support. Now imagine if every website just used HTML to create a single full page canvas element, and then used javascript to draw into that. people would eventually say that HTML is irrelevant and that we need a new model.
I should probably say I am not anti wayland (though X11 works well for me on a wide range of hardware including my phone). But the linux.conf.au 2013 talk makes a pretty good case https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIctzAQOe44 (it should also be required viewing before anyone is allowed to comment on wayland)
wayland is a pyramid scheme. the editors have mined lots of waylands when they were cheap, and now they are trying to push the price up so they can sell them all. anyone who thinks a wayland is worth $200 is a fool. they are only good for buying drugs. back to the gold standard. get off my lawn. waste of energy. where's my gun.
> There's much better ways to go about getting a good copy of whatever content is out there, especially since BluRay and DVD encryption have been broken for a long time.
i don't think that line of argument will convince netflix (or the studios) that easily breakable DRM is good enough.
there are several ways to break DRM. The first its to break the encryption. The CSS encryption on DVDs was weak, so to play a DVD you just brute force it. Or you can get hold of a key. Bluray players each have a key, if you can extract one of these you can then use it to play blurays Or you let the DRM software do the decryption, and then just capture the output. A locked down OS can prevent you from doing this, for example it can disable the screen shot function when you look at the DRM media. With an open OS and admin privileges i can always read the frame buffer.
PDF has a 'feature' to make a document un-printable. If the no printing flag is set in a file then the adobe pdf viewer will refuse to print it. some of the opensource pdf viewers have a build time options as to whether they respect this 'feature' https://lwn.net/Articles/335415/
why brute force decrypt it? the web browser is already sending a decrypted stream to your graphics server. there is plenty of screen recording software on linux.
The only way DRM can work if if you make the decrypted video uncaptureable. So on any system where the root user can read the frame buffer there is no point. HTML5 DRM will only work on systems that have DRM build in to the OS, which is pretty much the same systems that have silverlight.
The only way i can see it ever getting to linux is if the encrypted stream can be passed to rights managed hardware on a GPU. but then if i have a GPU that can effectively play the encrypted stream, why would i ever worry about decrypting it in the first place, i could dump the network stream to disk, and play back through GPU whenever I wanted.
i am sure a lot of people would be grateful for a database dump they could download, so that a) that can figure out where they are without incurring data charges, b) without uploading details about their location to a website. in that case the openbmap database dumps look good.
Slashdot Mirror
it is very different. some people prefer gnome2 over gnome3, just like some people prefer kde or e17 or xfce or xmonad. it would be odd for a distro to say we are removing gnome, you will use e17 now. (you can't parallel install gnome2 and gnome3, or easily have them both in the same distro).
it has higher system requirements. on my netbook i could no longer use an external display, because my GPU did not support large enough openGL textures. with gnome2 it was fine. llvmpipe may be a solution now, but i can't imagine the performance is good on a 32bit atom.
it has new bugs. gnome3 used to crash a lot for me. sometimes the only way to get it to log back in after was to delete the config file. i assume its better in 3.8, but i am happy with mate these days.
i think a good analogy is to image that the kernel developers removed ext4 now that they have btrfs. they could argue that btrfs has lots of new features, and that you would be stupid to want to use an old deadend file system that did not even have data checksumming and snapshots. that would go down well. (i use btrfs :-) )
dear gnome 2 users. here is gnome 3.0. we have changed everything, and it wont run on you 3 year old laptop any more. hope you like it because it will be really hard to keep using gnome2 while keeping up to date with other packages.if you don't like it please just wait a few years and we'll bring back some of the old features as a classic mode. hey, where have you all gone?
Its pretty much impossible to install gnome2 and gnome3 on the same system, or have them both in the same repo (unlike plenty of other similar sized projects what you can have multiple versions installed (KDE3 and 4, as many GCC, python and kernel versions as you want))
https://lwn.net/Articles/466872/
mate solved this difficult technical problem, mostly by doing 's/gnome/mate/g' (since then they have modernised the code, removed most of the deprecated libraries, and added useful features)
It would be good if other areas of industry had the strong safety regulation that nuclear has. for example fertiliser plants.
by not running a webbrowser with a full set of pluggins in the VM you would be protected from most security threats.
True, its a matter of opinion and semantics.
Does the US constitution make the US more or less free? It guarantee some freedoms, but it also removes your right to remove those freedoms and so could be seen as restrictive.
it takes a lot of words to keep the code free (which for some developers is a priority). GPL2 is fairly short, GPL3 works a bit harder to avoid loop holes that nobody though of in the 1980s.
so you can't take GPL code and use it to build a locked down product. that is the point of GPL.
I am sure most of those 1.7 million projects have no aspiration to become a real software project. do they have a website, mailing list/forum, releases, users? or are they just random little scripts, snippits and exercises, just put on line for the education of others?
For a large piece of coding i might care about getting bug fixes back. for the script i use to sort my digital photos in to folders based on the date in their exif, and is 50% lines pasted from documentation or stack exchange, i don't care. if you want to know which licences are used for serious projects then grab the top hundred or thousand from ohloh and check them.
now i have a good reason not to drink it without seeming squeamish.
ok. there are probably inaccuracies here (i am not an x developer, the video presenter is), but these seem like the import and points from the video
Large amounts of X11 are irrelevant now.
Most of the drawing code is unused now. the ui tool kit libraries draw to a bit map and send that to the screen.
Lots of the code for dealing with hardware and power management is now in the kernel.
X11 has I/O port management, PCI bus management, binary loaders, BIOS emulation, its basically an OS.
It has accumulates multiple input, display management and buffer stacks.
Most people use a composited window manager, so actually the WM draws the whole display, and sends everything as a single bitmap.
Most drawing does not even really use X, it uses DRI to talk directly to the hardware.
This has all been achieved by piling extensions on to X11, so as to keep the core protocol unchanged
Its very hard to make everything frame perfect in X11. when a window is resized X draws mess before the client has a chance to redraw. its very hard to avoid flicker and tearing.
Imagine if HTML5 had never removed anything, and so had thousands of tags that all web browsers had to support. Now imagine if every website just used HTML to create a single full page canvas element, and then used javascript to draw into that. people would eventually say that HTML is irrelevant and that we need a new model.
The tiniest open-source violin plays for you. (or at least it would if you had a local copy of tiny_opensource_violin.flac)
are you thinking of the dirac video codec?
I should probably say I am not anti wayland (though X11 works well for me on a wide range of hardware including my phone). But the linux.conf.au 2013 talk makes a pretty good case https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIctzAQOe44 (it should also be required viewing before anyone is allowed to comment on wayland)
wayland is a pyramid scheme. the editors have mined lots of waylands when they were cheap, and now they are trying to push the price up so they can sell them all. anyone who thinks a wayland is worth $200 is a fool. they are only good for buying drugs. back to the gold standard. get off my lawn. waste of energy. where's my gun.
solved by HDCP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-bandwidth_Digital_Content_Protection
> There's much better ways to go about getting a good copy of whatever content is out there, especially since BluRay and DVD encryption have been broken for a long time.
i don't think that line of argument will convince netflix (or the studios) that easily breakable DRM is good enough.
there are several ways to break DRM.
The first its to break the encryption. The CSS encryption on DVDs was weak, so to play a DVD you just brute force it.
Or you can get hold of a key. Bluray players each have a key, if you can extract one of these you can then use it to play blurays
Or you let the DRM software do the decryption, and then just capture the output. A locked down OS can prevent you from doing this, for example it can disable the screen shot function when you look at the DRM media. With an open OS and admin privileges i can always read the frame buffer.
PDF has a 'feature' to make a document un-printable. If the no printing flag is set in a file then the adobe pdf viewer will refuse to print it. some of the opensource pdf viewers have a build time options as to whether they respect this 'feature' https://lwn.net/Articles/335415/
why brute force decrypt it? the web browser is already sending a decrypted stream to your graphics server. there is plenty of screen recording software on linux.
But how do you implement DRM in a web browser in *BSD or Linux in such a way that I can't capture the decrypted video to disk?
The only way DRM can work if if you make the decrypted video uncaptureable. So on any system where the root user can read the frame buffer there is no point. HTML5 DRM will only work on systems that have DRM build in to the OS, which is pretty much the same systems that have silverlight.
The only way i can see it ever getting to linux is if the encrypted stream can be passed to rights managed hardware on a GPU. but then if i have a GPU that can effectively play the encrypted stream, why would i ever worry about decrypting it in the first place, i could dump the network stream to disk, and play back through GPU whenever I wanted.
how can you predict the average of 100 dice rolls, when you can't even predict what the next dice roll will give?
i might not mind manually turning on logging, and then uploading the data somewhere after a few weeks with the date and time stripped out.
i am sure a lot of people would be grateful for a database dump they could download, so that a) that can figure out where they are without incurring data charges, b) without uploading details about their location to a website. in that case the openbmap database dumps look good.
and they offer full database dumps.
http://openbmap.org/