Indeed, a civilized society that cares about the health and well-being of its members has to look at things statistically, and sometimes make the tough calls about how much soda one man can responsibly consume at a sitting or how tall grass is allowed to grow in a backyard.
That's not a "civilized society", that's a totalitarian society.
It's none of your business, and in fact, you have no idea what is "responsible" or "desirable" for me. Just because you think that reducing risk and extending your life is the right choice for you doesn't mean it's the right choice for me.
The world would also have been safer if the USSR had won the cold war and we'd all be living under a communist dictatorship. Safety isn't all that matters.
If Unity is intended to mimic OS X, it is doing a poor job of it. For example, OS X menu bars don't haphazardly switch between global and per-window and the OS X launcher doesn't cause your mouse to get stuck at the screen edge. If Shuttleworth fancies himself a UI designer or a Steve Jobs, he is sadly mistaken. Much as I dislike OS X, it is still lightyears ahead of Unity in terms of usability.
But more importantly, Unity is new software and a new UI design for Ubuntu users. The novelty that matters here is not whether someone on planet earth has come up with a similar interface before, the question is whether Ubuntu users are forced to change their habits for no good reason other than Canonical's commercial interests. The reason many people are using Linux is because they don't want to get screwed with every release like Microsoft screws their customers, and that's exactly what Canonical has been doing with Unity.
OK, here's the introduction to economics lecture. As a general rule, economic systems run more efficiently when people pay for the resources that they use, and run inefficiently when other people pay for resources that somebody else uses.
Both my ISP and my hosting company are effectively paid for by data volume and amortized hardware cost, so I pay for what I use online.
I don't use the post office, so I don't want to pay for them, through any form of tax.
I'll try another line of reasoning with the data that you already have. The National Broadband Map does not claim 100.0 percent coverage. If a school district plans to require children to complete online classes that require broadband, how should the school district serve children whose parents happen to live in uncovered zip codes?
Are there any school districts in uncovered areas? Are there any kids living there? Does it make sense for kids to be living there? Perhaps the parents moved there precisely to get away from the Internet.
A school district that "punts" this responsibility, choosing not to serve these children at all, will lose its state money, and a state that "punts" this responsibility will lose federal money.
Your point being, of course, that in order to fix the bad effects of one bad federal mandate we should add another bad federal mandate?
I don't see a problem. They can ask all they want. Bad copyright notices and unjustified license fee demands have been around for as long as copyright.
Spoken just like a person who has never had a single employee. There's a lot more to managing people than just getting X done in Y amount of time. People aren't just cogs in the proverbial machine, as you seem to imply they are.
You got it backwards. Telling people "you have to work for 8h/day no matter what you do" is treating them like cogs. Setting goals for them and giving them the freedom to accomplish them how they choose (and supporting them if necessary) is treating them like people.
f you knew anything 'technically' about Wayland you would actually be able to verbalize these shortcomings you refer to - but you can't.
I already verbalized them: putting renderers in client libraries or toolkits is lousy design. That was a workaround for the limits of X11's old rendering model, but it shouldn't be elevated to a principle.
Wayland does not splinter the community. Did you know that Wayland runs X in a container on demand for use by legacy applications - so nothing is left behind?
How naive and inexperienced are you? That's been tried multiple times, and I can tell you from first-hand experience: every time it worked like sh*t.
Unfortunately, now that they can't delete any more they're kind of stuck.
There would have been good ways of migrating from X11 to X12 without splintering the community. Instead, we will now end up with X11, Wayland, and Mir. X11 was the only thing that really still held the Linux desktop together.
You 'threaten' to give up on FOSS with you and your buddies because you feel like Wayland is rocking your boat. I'm sorry, but this is evolution - maybe it is time you left for 'easier' pastures.
The main problem with Wayland isn't that it sucks technically (which it does), the main problem is that it splinters the community. As if all the variations of ABIs and packages between Linux systems weren't enough already, now I have to worry about whether my applications run under X11, Wayland, Mir.I maintain some open source scientific software, and I simply don't have time for that kind of mess.
If you are poor its very silly to spend 100$ on smart-phone and another 30$ for monthly contract.
You can use your smartphone, Android media player, or tablet over WiFi, saving you the monthly contract, your home Internet subscription, and the cost of a whole PC. For a while, I was using voice/texting only on my Android phone (effectively, a few dollars per month) and just used all the other services over WiFi.
Since "criminal intent" seems to be largely defined as "not happy", 95% of people in various government office waiting rooms will be flagged as having "criminal intent". I suppose it clears out the waiting rooms faster.
Mono was also a *massive* strategic blunder: it would have been far more sensible if Miguel had built an open source clone of the JVM instead for his Linux GUI efforts
Java is patent encumbered, the JVM is a lousy architecture to begin with, Java had some of the worst and most bloated libraries ever conceived, and Java's lack of platform integration would have been a disaster for Linux. Sun's draconian rules and legal claims to Java prevented people from fixing the mess Sun had created. There were several open source clones of the JVM, none of which succeeded, in large part because of Sun. And apparently, you are still too dumb even to understand the distinction between.NET and Mono.
People like you have done a big disservice to the FOSS community by trying to push Java, a legal nightmare and technical disaster, and killing a technically much better and open alternative. Perhaps it was too much to hope for that Miguel would succeed against people like you, but I still think he could have done a better job by more clearly separating Mono from.NET and Microsoft.
Now we are left with complete shambles on Linux: most development on Linux is still done in C, C++, and Python, with no replacements in sight. Microsoft and Apple, meanwhile, both have moved to more modern and desktop-friendly platforms based on C# and Objective-C.
If by "having" you mean "marrying", I don't have a problem with that, provided the man or the woman can actually live up to the financial and personal obligations that entails, and everybody involved consents to it.
I've always believed in separating the artist from the art.
I don't. Art, and the knowledge and beliefs of an artist, influence me as a reader. Card is a devout and proselytizing Mormon, which means that he advocates intolerance, suffers from deficient moral reasoning, and holds believes that contradict established facts. As such, I wouldn't want to be influenced by his stories.
No, it's the same old drivel that people have been saying since before Stone was likely even born: "X11 is hard", "we're going to build something much simpler that solves all the problems".
X11 does need significant changes and a house cleaning. Maybe it needs to turn into X12 with some major incompatible changes. Wayland, however, is not the answer. If people keep up this nonsense, me and lots of other long time FOSS users and advocates are simply going to give up on Linux and FOSS altogether, because if FOSS developers are screwing around with me in the same way as commercial developers, then I might as well get the better support from commercial developers.
Mono is the best managed code environment outside of the JVM, and arguably better in many respects. Are you saying that Linux should not support any form of VM? Maybe you'll write us an alternative. Yeah, right.
Technically, Mono is great. Unfortunately, Miguel completely failed to establish it as a Linux standard by antagonizing much of the Linux community and failing to assuage licensing and patent concerns. Frankly, as an early Mono adopter and supporter, I feel let down by him. Let him be happy with his Mac; I won't miss him.
'While I missed the comprehensive Linux toolchain and userland, I did not miss having to chase the proper package for my current version of Linux, or beg someone to package something. Binaries just worked.' Here is one of his main reasons: 'To me, the fragmentation of Linux as a platform, the multiple incompatible distros, and the incompatibilities across versions of the same distro were my Three Mile Island/Chernobyl.
So, "apt-get install..." was too hard for him?
OS X does have better cross-version binary compatibility, but its dependency management is nonexistent.
Putting aside the obvious ambiguity of that statement, the result will be the opposite actually.
I don't see any ambiguity. And Wayland is merely capitulation to the lousy architecture of modern toolkits; that is, KDE and Gtk+ ignore much of the X11 infrastructure, in part out of ignorance, in part because they wanted to be cross platform, and in part, because X11's original graphics model didn't meet their needs.
As explained to you before, Canonical isn't a company that hunts around for fixes to 'the most pressing needs for Linux'. They aren't obliged to fix your issues
Did I say they were obligated? I'm just saying that I'm not interested in a Mir-based desktop, tablet, or phone. What used to make Linux and Ubuntu attractive was some adherence to long-established, open standards and a lot of useful functionality built on top of those. If I'm forced to use Unity on Mir, I might as well use Windows 8, iOS, or Android, because Canonical's offering is no better.
Whether Wayland will result in a more responsive or less responsive desktop is anybody's guess at this point. It looks like it will create code and data bloat, likely resulting in less responsiveness. And apparently, Canonical didn't like it, otherwise they wouldn't be pushing Mir now. As for Unity, I have yet to see anybody, novice to expert, who finds it easier than a traditional desktop.
In the end, a new graphics subsystem has not been the most pressing need for Linux. X11 and Gnome were good enough. Canonical would have done well to focus on fixing all the other problems with their distribution.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not a "civilized society", that's a totalitarian society.
It's none of your business, and in fact, you have no idea what is "responsible" or "desirable" for me. Just because you think that reducing risk and extending your life is the right choice for you doesn't mean it's the right choice for me.
Part of my family lived behind the iron curtain. Your statement isn't just complete and utter bullshit, it is offensive.
The world would also have been safer if the USSR had won the cold war and we'd all be living under a communist dictatorship. Safety isn't all that matters.
They want to integrate the shell into the display server? Wow, we're really regressing to the dark ages of display architectures here.
If Unity is intended to mimic OS X, it is doing a poor job of it. For example, OS X menu bars don't haphazardly switch between global and per-window and the OS X launcher doesn't cause your mouse to get stuck at the screen edge. If Shuttleworth fancies himself a UI designer or a Steve Jobs, he is sadly mistaken. Much as I dislike OS X, it is still lightyears ahead of Unity in terms of usability.
But more importantly, Unity is new software and a new UI design for Ubuntu users. The novelty that matters here is not whether someone on planet earth has come up with a similar interface before, the question is whether Ubuntu users are forced to change their habits for no good reason other than Canonical's commercial interests. The reason many people are using Linux is because they don't want to get screwed with every release like Microsoft screws their customers, and that's exactly what Canonical has been doing with Unity.
Both my ISP and my hosting company are effectively paid for by data volume and amortized hardware cost, so I pay for what I use online.
I don't use the post office, so I don't want to pay for them, through any form of tax.
So what exactly is your point?
Are there any school districts in uncovered areas? Are there any kids living there? Does it make sense for kids to be living there? Perhaps the parents moved there precisely to get away from the Internet.
Your point being, of course, that in order to fix the bad effects of one bad federal mandate we should add another bad federal mandate?
And that's why he keeps breaking long-established UI convention and keeps reinventing the wheel in any shape but round?
"Wanting to be different" is what is destroying Ubuntu.
I don't see a problem. They can ask all they want. Bad copyright notices and unjustified license fee demands have been around for as long as copyright.
Look, if you want to argue that there is a significant problem with Internet access, you come up with the data and arguments to support your position.
You got it backwards. Telling people "you have to work for 8h/day no matter what you do" is treating them like cogs. Setting goals for them and giving them the freedom to accomplish them how they choose (and supporting them if necessary) is treating them like people.
I already verbalized them: putting renderers in client libraries or toolkits is lousy design. That was a workaround for the limits of X11's old rendering model, but it shouldn't be elevated to a principle.
How naive and inexperienced are you? That's been tried multiple times, and I can tell you from first-hand experience: every time it worked like sh*t.
There would have been good ways of migrating from X11 to X12 without splintering the community. Instead, we will now end up with X11, Wayland, and Mir. X11 was the only thing that really still held the Linux desktop together.
The main problem with Wayland isn't that it sucks technically (which it does), the main problem is that it splinters the community. As if all the variations of ABIs and packages between Linux systems weren't enough already, now I have to worry about whether my applications run under X11, Wayland, Mir.I maintain some open source scientific software, and I simply don't have time for that kind of mess.
You can use your smartphone, Android media player, or tablet over WiFi, saving you the monthly contract, your home Internet subscription, and the cost of a whole PC. For a while, I was using voice/texting only on my Android phone (effectively, a few dollars per month) and just used all the other services over WiFi.
Romana: You mean you didn't believe his story?
The Doctor: No.
Romana: But he had such an honest face.
The Doctor: Romana, you can't be a successful crook with a dishonest face, can you?
Since "criminal intent" seems to be largely defined as "not happy", 95% of people in various government office waiting rooms will be flagged as having "criminal intent". I suppose it clears out the waiting rooms faster.
Java is patent encumbered, the JVM is a lousy architecture to begin with, Java had some of the worst and most bloated libraries ever conceived, and Java's lack of platform integration would have been a disaster for Linux. Sun's draconian rules and legal claims to Java prevented people from fixing the mess Sun had created. There were several open source clones of the JVM, none of which succeeded, in large part because of Sun. And apparently, you are still too dumb even to understand the distinction between .NET and Mono.
People like you have done a big disservice to the FOSS community by trying to push Java, a legal nightmare and technical disaster, and killing a technically much better and open alternative. Perhaps it was too much to hope for that Miguel would succeed against people like you, but I still think he could have done a better job by more clearly separating Mono from .NET and Microsoft.
Now we are left with complete shambles on Linux: most development on Linux is still done in C, C++, and Python, with no replacements in sight. Microsoft and Apple, meanwhile, both have moved to more modern and desktop-friendly platforms based on C# and Objective-C.
If by "having" you mean "marrying", I don't have a problem with that, provided the man or the woman can actually live up to the financial and personal obligations that entails, and everybody involved consents to it.
Would you have a problem with that?
I don't. Art, and the knowledge and beliefs of an artist, influence me as a reader. Card is a devout and proselytizing Mormon, which means that he advocates intolerance, suffers from deficient moral reasoning, and holds believes that contradict established facts. As such, I wouldn't want to be influenced by his stories.
No, it's the same old drivel that people have been saying since before Stone was likely even born: "X11 is hard", "we're going to build something much simpler that solves all the problems".
X11 does need significant changes and a house cleaning. Maybe it needs to turn into X12 with some major incompatible changes. Wayland, however, is not the answer. If people keep up this nonsense, me and lots of other long time FOSS users and advocates are simply going to give up on Linux and FOSS altogether, because if FOSS developers are screwing around with me in the same way as commercial developers, then I might as well get the better support from commercial developers.
Technically, Mono is great. Unfortunately, Miguel completely failed to establish it as a Linux standard by antagonizing much of the Linux community and failing to assuage licensing and patent concerns. Frankly, as an early Mono adopter and supporter, I feel let down by him. Let him be happy with his Mac; I won't miss him.
So, "apt-get install ..." was too hard for him?
OS X does have better cross-version binary compatibility, but its dependency management is nonexistent.
I don't see any ambiguity. And Wayland is merely capitulation to the lousy architecture of modern toolkits; that is, KDE and Gtk+ ignore much of the X11 infrastructure, in part out of ignorance, in part because they wanted to be cross platform, and in part, because X11's original graphics model didn't meet their needs.
Did I say they were obligated? I'm just saying that I'm not interested in a Mir-based desktop, tablet, or phone. What used to make Linux and Ubuntu attractive was some adherence to long-established, open standards and a lot of useful functionality built on top of those. If I'm forced to use Unity on Mir, I might as well use Windows 8, iOS, or Android, because Canonical's offering is no better.
Whether Wayland will result in a more responsive or less responsive desktop is anybody's guess at this point. It looks like it will create code and data bloat, likely resulting in less responsiveness. And apparently, Canonical didn't like it, otherwise they wouldn't be pushing Mir now. As for Unity, I have yet to see anybody, novice to expert, who finds it easier than a traditional desktop.
In the end, a new graphics subsystem has not been the most pressing need for Linux. X11 and Gnome were good enough. Canonical would have done well to focus on fixing all the other problems with their distribution.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Apparently, you're both complete morons.