I don't think that making the X config easier to do is neccessarily "dumbing-down" Linux. Quite the opposite.
To me, getting an optimal X config is not terribly difficult, but it is pure drudgery from where I sit. I, for one, would love to have a widget that could suck the info from a.inf or a cddb-style thing and use that as a basis for building an XF86Config file's modeline and monitor entries. Someone else mentioned also querying the VESA stuff from the monitor directly. I'm all for it.
If these sources of information provide what's needed to assemble optimal configs for the standard resolutions and bit-depths, great. Then, if I want a funky resolution, I can go edit the XF86Config myself.
Should we even do this? Do we really want to change things to make it easier for EVERYONE (read: computer illerate)?
In a word, yes.
Linux must make some progress toward becoming mainstream. That's ok, since we can still have it as raw and unfiltered as we want, but if my mom is ever going to have a machine with Linux on it, it must have some provision for making it simple to get working. To avoid doing so means marginalizing Linux, and that would be tragic.
No Apple story on Slashdot would be complete without you putting a negative spin on it. Keep up the bad work!
Actually, no Apple story in any news media would be complete without putting a negative spin on it. Even when the news is good, there always seems to be a little barb like "...the once-beleaguered computer maker..." thrown in for good measure...
Second, my original post has nothing to do with whether the DOJ program is effective or desirable. It has to do with the slashdot summary of the article being misguided in saying that the DOJ attack against crackers is an attack against the foundation of the current computer prosperity (i.e. hackers). These are two different things.
That was not my read of this at all. The reporting of the DOJ program as targeting would-be hackers is, I think, correct, since this is exactly what the DOJ program is going to do. No matter how much we scream and holler that hacker != cracker, the common perception is that hacker == cracker. If the the DOJ program is actually targeting would-be crackers, but calling 'em hackers, then what it really does is further demonize hacking.
I can see it now... The "War on Drugs" becomes the "War on Hackers" and half of us end up in jail for "intent to distribute" illicit information.
All DVD players are the same. They can all read all of the DVD data the same.
Not true. Not at all. Saying DVD is a standard is like saying HTML is a standard.
I'm blessed with a first-generation player, and it chokes on the Matrix. Bad. If I have the "White Rabbit" feature turned off, it sputters and chokes over the "hidden" material, then the sound is out of sync with the video. Very annoying. (BTW, to correct this, after the stuttering, pause, then continue seems to get audio and video back in sync)
Meanwhile, a friend of mine has a cheap (new) DVD player, and it works fine.
It looks (to me) like the head is not tracking quickly enough and it mucks up the mpeg stream. Or, the read-ahead buffer is too small. Or... it's a first-gen player. I had to expect it.
Lesson for linux-heads: Want market share of the desktop ("world domination")? Do more ease-of-use stuff.
I think one of the major problems with tossing around the phrase "easy-to-use" is that no-one ever really defines who is supposed to find it easier.
Is it the complete neophyte who knows nothing about computers at all? If so, no mainstream OS qualifies. Is it the casual user? Is it the "power" user? Or is it the totally geeked-out hacker type?
Ultimately, if the "ease-of-use" factor strays too far below the user's skill/knowledge level, s/he's going to find the OS getting in their way with too many wizards and "are you sure?" dialogs. If "ease-of-use" was keyed to a more advanced user, the user's going to be intimidated by the system, and may never use it to the fullest.
And let's not forget that the user generally learns about the system as they go. So, what the user once considered a difficult task s/he may come to view as simple, if only through rote repetition. Does the system get out of their way once they've learned these tasks? Or does it force them to continue to use the "easy-to-use" wizards and whatnot?
The real problem here is that there is no such thing as one-size-fits all. Personally, I think that is misguided and silly to try to do it. Look @ Windows. It tries to be all things to all people, and as a result, isn't. Is that what we want Linux to aspire to? I don't think so...
My favorite example for why software companies should fear GNU/Linux is the GIMP. Bye bye Adobe Photoshop. That won't be a price crash (ugh.. hundreds of dollars to touch up images?), it will be a total switchover from one product to another.:) It depends on the software, I suppose.. But still, it would be more of a drop than a/crash/..
Uh..no. Photoshop is more than just "touching up images". Don't get me wrong. I've used the Gimp. I like the Gimp. But in a blow-by-blow comparision, it's still lacking. Is PS worth USD$600? That's up to the individual user's need to determine.
Basically, if you run an OS that actually bothers to manage memory efficiently (contraty to the belief of the Windows-lovers I've met in my time, that is/not/ one of them) you eventually get to a point where getting the latest badass processor just isn't that big a deal.
I'd be willing to bet that this is already happening.
Just this evening, I was talking with a friend of mine about the whole G4 debacle that Apple kicked off this week. And he was bemoaning the fact that the G4 boxen were going to be hard to come by for the near future.
Now, MacOS doesn't even pretend to manage memory efficiently, but I found my self thinking that I really had no reason to upgrade my G3 box (Gossamer) for at least another year. It's reasonably fast, unusually stable, and does everything I ask of it. The only reason I might have to upgrade is if MacOS9 or X bloats out - really bad.
I've about had it up to here with these reports (not the reports themselves, but the content) that corp's seem to have it in their heads that since they paid for the equipment, they own it, and that by extension, since they pay for the employees, they own them as well.
A coworker of mine recently sent a clipping out of the employee handbook from where I work that basically says that corp security has every right to arbirarily search not only my computers (one of which I've paid for myself - let the lawyers figure that one out), but file cabinets, boxes, drawers, and - get this - backpacks, briefcases, etc.
I've been filing this kind of stuff under "Corporate Human-rights abuses". It reminds me of the same kind of nonsense one would expect from a facist government, not a modern corporation.
If someone who lives there can laugh in the face of destruction, who the hell are the rest of us to wax judgemental?
I've no problem with it so long as the people laughing at the danger are the same people facing the danger. Pointing at the guy and implying he's an idiot for living in a boat in a region subject to hurricanes is just mean-spirited.
The thing is, though, there's no place in North America (or the world, AFAIK) that's completely safe from natural disasters of some kind. Hurricanes, tornados, flooding, earthquakes, volcanos, blizzards, etc.. - everyone is at some risk. We'd all do well to remember that.
To me, to get to live on a boat in Florida during the non-hurricane seasons (most of the rest of the year) sounds pretty sweet. I wish the guy the best. For those laughing - shame on you.
You just point your Palm at the TV and it automatically changes its controls to those of the television remote; point at the lamp and you get a switch, which sends a signal to your X-10 unit via the Jini proxy.
Yes!
This is exactly what I got about what was the "thing" with Jini - devices that can communicate with each other on the fly, dependent only on context.
Other examples using the Palm (or some other handheld) with Jini-capable devices: programming the thermostat in the house, setting the vcr, collecting voice messages from the phone (for later playback). Or as ordinary as finally making the handheld's synchronization with the desktop a lot more seamless.
if you have old PS games, you have an old PS, therefore you don't need backwards compatibility
True, I may not need backward compatability, but let's face it - Sony needs it. They'll be going up against DreamCast which, by the time PSX2 ships, will have been on the market for, what, six months. To hit the streets with an entire established library of games is a good thing.
Besides, I want backward compatability. I've already got too many toys hanging off my AV system as it is. AV switches are an ugly "solution". This is much better.
This whole "I'm only linking" bull is no excuse, if you link to the file deliberately or help someone obtain illegal product you are in the wrong and you are an accomplice to the distribution of "stolen" material.
I agree. If this kid intentionally posted links to MP3's that he knew were illegal, he's in the wrong. I also think that it would only be fair for him to have to forfeit the profits on advertising from this page. I don't think he should be liable for "lost profits" on the MP3s, unless it can be proved that he owned the target site also.
What bothers me about all of this is the general paranoia that seems to exist about MP3s. Someone else noted that the article mentioned the "illegal format" of the files that were linked to. (?!)
It's troubling to think that if I post MP3s of my pitiful performances with a musical instrument, or my sensless ramblings, that I could be suspect simply because the files have ".mp3" at the end of the filename.
Agreed. I'm a bit creeped out though by the information in the FAQ on this beast, under "How much will it cost?"
When we go to market with this product we may try non-traditional business models such as lowering the price to consumers in return for displaying banners on their fridge doors.
Uh... Thanks, but no thanks.
More and more, we're being bombarded with advertising: "Try this, it'll change your life" or "Buy this, it'll make you sexy!" or "You've just GOT to have one of these!!" Can't turn on the TV, the radio, or fire up a web browser or email without being solicited by someone to "Click Here!" or "Buy now!!" For fsck's sake, enough already! I can't even get in my car and drive out to the country without seeing billboard after billboard beckoning me to buy more stuff!
The last think I want to do is actually invite even more advertising into my home with one of these monsters... Ugh...
Yes, W2K has the ability to do packet filtering on its own as well as applying IPSec to the connections that it does allow.
It's not as comprehensive as a "true" firewall; not all the bits in the headers are available for filtering, but the standard stuff (IP addresses, protocols, UDP/TCP ports, etc) is trapable...
...why didn't I think of that?! I could be stinking rich...
Seriously, this strikes me as being a contender for the stupidest thing yet. But it makes money, so they'll be able to go public and make a ton of coin on other people's stupidity.
Meanwhile, once the reruns of Gilligan's Island stop, ET will then get spammed.
This is my primary argument any time someone sees my IIIx and starts asking things like "When is there going to be a color version?" or "What do you mean, it just beeps??" or "What kind of games can you possibly run on a screen that small?"
My answer is almost always that simplicity is golden. Besides, I rather like having battery lifetimes expressed in weeks instead of hours...
My question is.. What happens when we can get all the whizzy features (MP3, Quicktime, gobs and gobs of memory, colour, etc) while maintaining the form factor of the palms, the battery life of the palms, and the price point of the palms? Would you buy one?? Would I? Would the simplicity argument still hold?
Y'know, it's really sad (in a pathetic kind of way) how short memories are...
The Z-whatever described in the press release as "The Perfect Blend Of Groundbreaking Design, Cutting-Edge Technology And Operational Simplicity In A Home Computer" It's pretty amusing to think of what their definition of operational simplicity must be if they're installing Windows98 on these boxes.
But anyway...
I guess these guys never saw a 20th Anniversary Mac, or even a Monorail box. And, I remember the pizzabox machine too.
In three years, they'll be coming out with beige machines that you put under your desk. I can see the press release now: "...Neutral color compliments any decor, while the concealable main unit hides unobtrusively under your desk." And the same fools will be slobbering over them...
I don't agree. To borrow someone *elses* analogy, It'd be like saying that as long as I rent the apartment, I have to drink Pepsi, not Coke. ?!?! Who cares what flavor of cola it is?
True, I can see them not wanting me to make money doing webhosting, or filling the pipes with my personal MP3 collection, but so long as I'm 1) paying my bill, and 2) doing no harm to their precious infrastructure, it should make no difference.
Hey, they're just pipes, everything else is policy, therefore arbitrary.
Given that the goal seems to be to help the RIAA make even more money, what are the odds that the encoder for M$Audio will be either non-existent or hopelessly crippled...
Oh, and if it is, what platform will it be available on?? Anyone?
Windows source code bad for free software movement
on
Open Source Windows
·
· Score: 1
Actually, this is right along the lines of what I was just thinking...
But, what if, instead of FUD, M$ turns around and sues for the alleged use of their code in that other project. We all know that it's not going to be GPL'ed; there will be some fairly restrictive terms for re-use of the code.
After all, this would be the same sort of thing that the've accused their competitors of doing for years - competition through litigation.
By your definition an executable virus is not really a computer virus, because it takes a person to run it.
I don't think that's what he was saying. I think the point is that unlike "traditional" virii, Melissa required the interaction of the user by way of opening the attached doc.
The trick here was exploiting the human machine in spreading the virus. If users never opened the doc, the virus would never have spread. To get them to open the doc, though, is frightfully simple. Just entice them, exploiting a characteristic that we all carry - curiosity. "Hmmm.. What's in this document?"
What I'd really like to know, having seen the "code" from this thing, is why a macro language in an application has unchecked access to the system registry?!
I don't think the patent issue is that big a deal, long-term; there's enough prior art for this to work.
What I first thought of here was the similarity in names - VMware, freemware (say it out loud). As I understand it, this would be a trademark violation, no?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think that making the X config easier to do is neccessarily "dumbing-down" Linux. Quite the opposite.
To me, getting an optimal X config is not terribly difficult, but it is pure drudgery from where I sit. I, for one, would love to have a widget that could suck the info from a .inf or a cddb-style thing and use that as a basis for building an XF86Config file's modeline and monitor entries. Someone else mentioned also querying the VESA stuff from the monitor directly. I'm all for it.
If these sources of information provide what's needed to assemble optimal configs for the standard resolutions and bit-depths, great. Then, if I want a funky resolution, I can go edit the XF86Config myself.
In a word, yes.
Linux must make some progress toward becoming mainstream. That's ok, since we can still have it as raw and unfiltered as we want, but if my mom is ever going to have a machine with Linux on it, it must have some provision for making it simple to get working. To avoid doing so means marginalizing Linux, and that would be tragic.
Actually, no Apple story in any news media would be complete without putting a negative spin on it. Even when the news is good, there always seems to be a little barb like "...the once-beleaguered computer maker..." thrown in for good measure...
That was not my read of this at all. The reporting of the DOJ program as targeting would-be hackers is, I think, correct, since this is exactly what the DOJ program is going to do. No matter how much we scream and holler that hacker != cracker, the common perception is that hacker == cracker. If the the DOJ program is actually targeting would-be crackers, but calling 'em hackers, then what it really does is further demonize hacking.
I can see it now... The "War on Drugs" becomes the "War on Hackers" and half of us end up in jail for "intent to distribute" illicit information.
Not true. Not at all. Saying DVD is a standard is like saying HTML is a standard.
I'm blessed with a first-generation player, and it chokes on the Matrix. Bad. If I have the "White Rabbit" feature turned off, it sputters and chokes over the "hidden" material, then the sound is out of sync with the video. Very annoying. (BTW, to correct this, after the stuttering, pause, then continue seems to get audio and video back in sync)
Meanwhile, a friend of mine has a cheap (new) DVD player, and it works fine.
It looks (to me) like the head is not tracking quickly enough and it mucks up the mpeg stream. Or, the read-ahead buffer is too small. Or... it's a first-gen player. I had to expect it.
I think one of the major problems with tossing around the phrase "easy-to-use" is that no-one ever really defines who is supposed to find it easier.
Is it the complete neophyte who knows nothing about computers at all? If so, no mainstream OS qualifies. Is it the casual user? Is it the "power" user? Or is it the totally geeked-out hacker type?
Ultimately, if the "ease-of-use" factor strays too far below the user's skill/knowledge level, s/he's going to find the OS getting in their way with too many wizards and "are you sure?" dialogs. If "ease-of-use" was keyed to a more advanced user, the user's going to be intimidated by the system, and may never use it to the fullest.
And let's not forget that the user generally learns about the system as they go. So, what the user once considered a difficult task s/he may come to view as simple, if only through rote repetition. Does the system get out of their way once they've learned these tasks? Or does it force them to continue to use the "easy-to-use" wizards and whatnot?
The real problem here is that there is no such thing as one-size-fits all. Personally, I think that is misguided and silly to try to do it. Look @ Windows. It tries to be all things to all people, and as a result, isn't. Is that what we want Linux to aspire to? I don't think so...
Uh..no. Photoshop is more than just "touching up images". Don't get me wrong. I've used the Gimp. I like the Gimp. But in a blow-by-blow comparision, it's still lacking. Is PS worth USD$600? That's up to the individual user's need to determine.
I'd be willing to bet that this is already happening.
Just this evening, I was talking with a friend of mine about the whole G4 debacle that Apple kicked off this week. And he was bemoaning the fact that the G4 boxen were going to be hard to come by for the near future.
Now, MacOS doesn't even pretend to manage memory efficiently, but I found my self thinking that I really had no reason to upgrade my G3 box (Gossamer) for at least another year. It's reasonably fast, unusually stable, and does everything I ask of it. The only reason I might have to upgrade is if MacOS9 or X bloats out - really bad.
Now I wonder... I can't be the only one, can I?
I'd quit.
Agreed!!
I've about had it up to here with these reports (not the reports themselves, but the content) that corp's seem to have it in their heads that since they paid for the equipment, they own it, and that by extension, since they pay for the employees, they own them as well.
A coworker of mine recently sent a clipping out of the employee handbook from where I work that basically says that corp security has every right to arbirarily search not only my computers (one of which I've paid for myself - let the lawyers figure that one out), but file cabinets, boxes, drawers, and - get this - backpacks, briefcases, etc.
I've been filing this kind of stuff under "Corporate Human-rights abuses". It reminds me of the same kind of nonsense one would expect from a facist government, not a modern corporation.
If someone who lives there can laugh in the face of destruction, who the hell are the rest of us to wax judgemental?
I've no problem with it so long as the people laughing at the danger are the same people facing the danger. Pointing at the guy and implying he's an idiot for living in a boat in a region subject to hurricanes is just mean-spirited.
Great. Keep laughing.
The thing is, though, there's no place in North America (or the world, AFAIK) that's completely safe from natural disasters of some kind. Hurricanes, tornados, flooding, earthquakes, volcanos, blizzards, etc.. - everyone is at some risk. We'd all do well to remember that.
To me, to get to live on a boat in Florida during the non-hurricane seasons (most of the rest of the year) sounds pretty sweet. I wish the guy the best. For those laughing - shame on you.
You just point your Palm at the TV and it automatically changes its controls to those of the television remote; point at the lamp and you get a switch, which sends a signal to your X-10 unit via the Jini proxy.
Yes!
This is exactly what I got about what was the "thing" with Jini - devices that can communicate with each other on the fly, dependent only on context.
Other examples using the Palm (or some other handheld) with Jini-capable devices: programming the thermostat in the house, setting the vcr, collecting voice messages from the phone (for later playback). Or as ordinary as finally making the handheld's synchronization with the desktop a lot more seamless.
Tons of possibilities...
if you have old PS games, you have an old PS, therefore you don't need backwards compatibility
True, I may not need backward compatability, but let's face it - Sony needs it. They'll be going up against DreamCast which, by the time PSX2 ships, will have been on the market for, what, six months. To hit the streets with an entire established library of games is a good thing.
Besides, I want backward compatability. I've already got too many toys hanging off my AV system as it is. AV switches are an ugly "solution". This is much better.
This whole "I'm only linking" bull is no excuse, if you link to the file deliberately or help someone obtain illegal product you are in the wrong and you are an accomplice to the distribution of "stolen" material.
I agree. If this kid intentionally posted links to MP3's that he knew were illegal, he's in the wrong. I also think that it would only be fair for him to have to forfeit the profits on advertising from this page. I don't think he should be liable for "lost profits" on the MP3s, unless it can be proved that he owned the target site also.
What bothers me about all of this is the general paranoia that seems to exist about MP3s. Someone else noted that the article mentioned the "illegal format" of the files that were linked to. (?!)
It's troubling to think that if I post MP3s of my pitiful performances with a musical instrument, or my sensless ramblings, that I could be suspect simply because the files have ".mp3" at the end of the filename.
Agreed. I'm a bit creeped out though by the information in the FAQ on this beast, under "How much will it cost?"
Uh... Thanks, but no thanks.
More and more, we're being bombarded with advertising: "Try this, it'll change your life" or "Buy this, it'll make you sexy!" or "You've just GOT to have one of these!!" Can't turn on the TV, the radio, or fire up a web browser or email without being solicited by someone to "Click Here!" or "Buy now!!" For fsck's sake, enough already! I can't even get in my car and drive out to the country without seeing billboard after billboard beckoning me to buy more stuff!
The last think I want to do is actually invite even more advertising into my home with one of these monsters... Ugh...
Yes, W2K has the ability to do packet filtering on its own as well as applying IPSec to the connections that it does allow.
It's not as comprehensive as a "true" firewall; not all the bits in the headers are available for filtering, but the standard stuff (IP addresses, protocols, UDP/TCP ports, etc) is trapable...
...why didn't I think of that?! I could be stinking rich...
Seriously, this strikes me as being a contender for the stupidest thing yet. But it makes money, so they'll be able to go public and make a ton of coin on other people's stupidity.
Meanwhile, once the reruns of Gilligan's Island stop, ET will then get spammed.
Amen!
This is my primary argument any time someone sees my IIIx and starts asking things like "When is there going to be a color version?" or "What do you mean, it just beeps??" or "What kind of games can you possibly run on a screen that small?"
My answer is almost always that simplicity is golden. Besides, I rather like having battery lifetimes expressed in weeks instead of hours...
My question is.. What happens when we can get all the whizzy features (MP3, Quicktime, gobs and gobs of memory, colour, etc) while maintaining the form factor of the palms, the battery life of the palms, and the price point of the palms? Would you buy one?? Would I? Would the simplicity argument still hold?
Y'know, it's really sad (in a pathetic kind of way) how short memories are...
The Z-whatever described in the press release as "The Perfect Blend Of Groundbreaking Design, Cutting-Edge Technology And Operational Simplicity In A Home Computer" It's pretty amusing to think of what their definition of operational simplicity must be if they're installing Windows98 on these boxes.
But anyway...
I guess these guys never saw a 20th Anniversary Mac, or even a Monorail box. And, I remember the pizzabox machine too.
In three years, they'll be coming out with beige machines that you put under your desk. I can see the press release now: "...Neutral color compliments any decor, while the concealable main unit hides unobtrusively under your desk." And the same fools will be slobbering over them...
I don't agree. To borrow someone *elses* analogy, It'd be like saying that as long as I rent the apartment, I have to drink Pepsi, not Coke. ?!?! Who cares what flavor of cola it is?
True, I can see them not wanting me to make money doing webhosting, or filling the pipes with my personal MP3 collection, but so long as I'm 1) paying my bill, and 2) doing no harm to their precious infrastructure, it should make no difference.
Hey, they're just pipes, everything else is policy, therefore arbitrary.
Given that the goal seems to be to help the RIAA make even more money, what are the odds that the encoder for M$Audio will be either non-existent or hopelessly crippled...
Oh, and if it is, what platform will it be available on?? Anyone?
Actually, this is right along the lines of what I was just thinking...
But, what if, instead of FUD, M$ turns around and sues for the alleged use of their code in that other project. We all know that it's not going to be GPL'ed; there will be some fairly restrictive terms for re-use of the code.
After all, this would be the same sort of thing that the've accused their competitors of doing for years - competition through litigation.
Scary...
I don't think that's what he was saying. I think the point is that unlike "traditional" virii, Melissa required the interaction of the user by way of opening the attached doc.
The trick here was exploiting the human machine in spreading the virus. If users never opened the doc, the virus would never have spread. To get them to open the doc, though, is frightfully simple. Just entice them, exploiting a characteristic that we all carry - curiosity. "Hmmm.. What's in this document?"
What I'd really like to know, having seen the "code" from this thing, is why a macro language in an application has unchecked access to the system registry?!
I don't think the patent issue is that big a deal, long-term; there's enough prior art for this to work.
What I first thought of here was the similarity in names - VMware, freemware (say it out loud). As I understand it, this would be a trademark violation, no?
I don't know, it's not really a pet if you can turn it off so it doesn't bug you, no?
That said, I'd like to get one for my cat to "play" with...