My solution in Windows was to give myself read-only access to my desktop folder. After the first few access denied messages it became habit to put stuff somewhere besides the desktop.
Driver has to go with the kernel for it to work. Nvidia won't provide binary drivers. I'll have to add that to your kernel compiling script.
No. The reason is because linux developers refuse to provide a stable driver interface to the linux kernel. They do this on purpose to try and get driver developers to release their drivers' source and have them integrated into the kernel.
I wouldn't know about newer versions as the last verion I played was 1.0, but I never complained about the betas. 1.0 had some really annoying changes. For example, the running animations were changed completely, so the characters looked like they had sticks up their asses while they ran. Supposedly it was more "realistic", but I thought it looked like crap. Also, a few good maps were removed from the official rotation with 1.0.
"Yeah, sort of like starting out a post with the word "strawman"."
If that offends you then don't make strawman arguments.
IMO, spending a large amount of money to move every desktop to a new operating system would be a huge waste of money, and I would never advocate that. It sounds like we agree on that point, except I don't think that was the point of the person you replied to.
Whoops. I stopped paying much attention to your post after started with the ad hominem BS, and missed your semantics lesson.
So by your defeintion of upgrade, I take it there is the requirement that every desktop PC run the same OS in your enterprise? If so your situation is rare. Most businesses start getting new PC's with the new OS, and run a mix of OSs.
Nice to see strawman arguments getting modded insightful. When you started using the current OS that you are using, did you throw out every desktop and replace them all with new ones?
"If Frauhoff (sp?) had enforced their patent from day one, you would not be seeing mp3's in existence now, or at any time until after the patent ran out."
First of all, you ovbiously didn't RTFA. This has nothing to do with Fraunhofer.
Second of all, Fraunhofer has always enforced their patent from day one. Back in ~1997, when mp3's first started to gain popularity with digital audio enthusiats, several third party encoders popped up, which were based on Fraunhofer's reference source code. Shortly after their release, Fraunhofer would contact the makers of these encoders, inform them of their patent, and ask for royalties. As a result, the encoders would suddenly disappear from the makers' websites with a message stating "Sorry, I can't distibute my encoder any more, because Fraunhofer wants royalties."
mp3 took off because it filled a need, it was the best thing available at filling that need at the time - not because of a submarine patent. Early commercial encoders, like music match jukebox and mp3pro paid royalties to Fraunhofer from day one.
If you're curious, I have a 'boneyard' of retro mp3 encoders on my site with a few of these extinct encoders.*
Re:Whoever modded parent 'flamebait' is full of it
on
The Future of NetBSD
·
· Score: 1
Actually, Bob Young from Red Hat mentioned that one reason they chose to make Red Hat Linux instead of Red Hat BSD was because they knew the GPL would keep Microsoft from running them over.
Well that does it. The GPL is great and the BSD license will cause you to be run over by evil greedy corporations. Bob Young said it, so it must be true, right?
Re:Whoever modded parent 'flamebait' is full of it
on
The Future of NetBSD
·
· Score: 1
You are misinformed. The success of Linux has a lot more to do with the BSD camp's missteps in the early days than anything else.
In the early days when Linux and *BSD were both relatively obscure nothings in the grand scheme of things, BSD was simply less accessible than Linux. BSD devs balked a bit at supporting "low-end" hardware, like cheap IDE controllers, and the sources were not quite as accessible.
Linux on the other hand was available for download everywhere. Linux devs focused much more on supporting cheap commodity hardware (remember, the initial goal of Linux was to be a DESKTOP operating system). Thus Linux was easier to get a hold of, use, and hack on.
There was also the AT&T lawsuit fiasco, which held the BSD sources hostage until 1994 when a settlement was reached. This drove *many* developers over to Linux, despite the fact that linux was an absolute peice of shit compared to BSD during that time. Another non-license-based factor was simple marketing. Yes, that's right...marketing. Linux was advocated by its developers and users from day one, while the FreeBSD Advocacy project was just started a few years ago.
Unfortunately, modern day GPL evangelists are rewriting history in regards to the roots of Linux's success. What's sad is these people probably don't even realize that they are rewriting history. These are the same retards who think every successful open source projects' source is licensed under the GPL. Ask your average GPL fanatic what license Apache, or Firefox, or Perl, or bind, or XFree/Org is licensed under and most of them will say, "The GPL of course!".
Lately, due to the problems with FBSD 4 getting obsolete hardware-support-wise, and FBSD 5 not looking very promising, we've been steadily migrating to NetBSD 2 and then 3. Your summary is very apt for what I also have learned during this migration.
I realize many FreeBSD users were turned off by FreeBSD 5.x, but I would suggest having a look at FreeBSD 6.x, if you haven't. In my experience so far, the SMP support is much better now, and the new ULE scheduler is usable now. And of course, being a newer release, newer hardware support is there.
"...he is one of the best informed level-headed industry pundits out there."
I would have to disagree strongly on that. IMO, he's a Windows user/fan who doesn't know much about Windows*, and his bashings of Vista illustrate that ignorance quite nicely. Anyway, I didn't bother to read the article. Apple copied Microsoft, Microsoft copied Apple, and the GNU/Linux desktop community copied them both. So what? It's human nature to copy others.
* I feel weird linking to my own post, but I don't really have anything new to say on the subject.
"I've had accounts on POSIX-compliant systems for years. I've found that with only user-level access I'm quite able to compile or install applications for my own user account in my own home directory without much difficulty, and still maintain the system integrity. As long as Microsoft holds on to the registry they'll never achieve such."
You obviosuly don't know much about the Windows or it's registry.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a *BSD user and fan myself...but that there was *funny*.
There was no such thing as "file and system privileges" in the Win9x series of OSs.
"Quad-core machines? Linux works on those just fine."
Now if Linux could only keep time on those systems without stupid kernel tweaks, or grub boot loader switches, it might be worth a shit.
My solution in Windows was to give myself read-only access to my desktop folder. After the first few access denied messages it became habit to put stuff somewhere besides the desktop.
Driver has to go with the kernel for it to work. Nvidia won't provide binary drivers. I'll have to add that to your kernel compiling script.
No. The reason is because linux developers refuse to provide a stable driver interface to the linux kernel. They do this on purpose to try and get driver developers to release their drivers' source and have them integrated into the kernel.
Holy crap. I agree.
I wouldn't know about newer versions as the last verion I played was 1.0, but I never complained about the betas. 1.0 had some really annoying changes. For example, the running animations were changed completely, so the characters looked like they had sticks up their asses while they ran. Supposedly it was more "realistic", but I thought it looked like crap. Also, a few good maps were removed from the official rotation with 1.0.
CS was cool until it hit 1.0.
Long live Beta 7.1.
You just compared a CD with cookie cutter.
"Yeah, sort of like starting out a post with the word "strawman"."
If that offends you then don't make strawman arguments.
IMO, spending a large amount of money to move every desktop to a new operating system would be a huge waste of money, and I would never advocate that. It sounds like we agree on that point, except I don't think that was the point of the person you replied to.
What high school would that be?
--Your friendly BSA agent
Whoops. I stopped paying much attention to your post after started with the ad hominem BS, and missed your semantics lesson.
So by your defeintion of upgrade, I take it there is the requirement that every desktop PC run the same OS in your enterprise? If so your situation is rare. Most businesses start getting new PC's with the new OS, and run a mix of OSs.
So are denying that you said this?
"So, perhaps you can name a SINGLE "useful new feature" that is worth $170k in new desktops across my enterprise."
Sounds like your talking about *NEW DESKTOPS* to me.
Is "new desktops" your code word for uprading the OS, or are you jsut mad at being caught making a strawman?
Nice to see strawman arguments getting modded insightful. When you started using the current OS that you are using, did you throw out every desktop and replace them all with new ones?
"How is this an insightful comment?"
New here?
"If Frauhoff (sp?) had enforced their patent from day one, you would not be seeing mp3's in existence now, or at any time until after the patent ran out."
First of all, you ovbiously didn't RTFA. This has nothing to do with Fraunhofer.
Second of all, Fraunhofer has always enforced their patent from day one. Back in ~1997, when mp3's first started to gain popularity with digital audio enthusiats, several third party encoders popped up, which were based on Fraunhofer's reference source code. Shortly after their release, Fraunhofer would contact the makers of these encoders, inform them of their patent, and ask for royalties. As a result, the encoders would suddenly disappear from the makers' websites with a message stating "Sorry, I can't distibute my encoder any more, because Fraunhofer wants royalties."
mp3 took off because it filled a need, it was the best thing available at filling that need at the time - not because of a submarine patent. Early commercial encoders, like music match jukebox and mp3pro paid royalties to Fraunhofer from day one.
If you're curious, I have a 'boneyard' of retro mp3 encoders on my site with a few of these extinct encoders.*
http://www.toadlife.net/stuff/retro_mp3_encoders/
*Please don't sue me Fraunhofer.
Well that does it. The GPL is great and the BSD license will cause you to be run over by evil greedy corporations. Bob Young said it, so it must be true, right?
You are misinformed. The success of Linux has a lot more to do with the BSD camp's missteps in the early days than anything else.
In the early days when Linux and *BSD were both relatively obscure nothings in the grand scheme of things, BSD was simply less accessible than Linux. BSD devs balked a bit at supporting "low-end" hardware, like cheap IDE controllers, and the sources were not quite as accessible.
Linux on the other hand was available for download everywhere. Linux devs focused much more on supporting cheap commodity hardware (remember, the initial goal of Linux was to be a DESKTOP operating system). Thus Linux was easier to get a hold of, use, and hack on.
There was also the AT&T lawsuit fiasco, which held the BSD sources hostage until 1994 when a settlement was reached. This drove *many* developers over to Linux, despite the fact that linux was an absolute peice of shit compared to BSD during that time. Another non-license-based factor was simple marketing. Yes, that's right...marketing. Linux was advocated by its developers and users from day one, while the FreeBSD Advocacy project was just started a few years ago.
Unfortunately, modern day GPL evangelists are rewriting history in regards to the roots of Linux's success. What's sad is these people probably don't even realize that they are rewriting history. These are the same retards who think every successful open source projects' source is licensed under the GPL. Ask your average GPL fanatic what license Apache, or Firefox, or Perl, or bind, or XFree/Org is licensed under and most of them will say, "The GPL of course!".
I realize many FreeBSD users were turned off by FreeBSD 5.x, but I would suggest having a look at FreeBSD 6.x, if you haven't. In my experience so far, the SMP support is much better now, and the new ULE scheduler is usable now. And of course, being a newer release, newer hardware support is there.
"Then lick my balls."
Yeah right. They're probably not even your balls.
"I'm sacrificing how much of my CPU or GPU for those half assed transparent windows??? I think not..."
The answer to that would be "none", as Vista turns it off when fullscreen apps (games) load.
I thnik the fnidnigs of taht rseercah is coercrt. I had no trolbue raeding taht.
"...he is one of the best informed level-headed industry pundits out there."
I would have to disagree strongly on that. IMO, he's a Windows user/fan who doesn't know much about Windows*, and his bashings of Vista illustrate that ignorance quite nicely. Anyway, I didn't bother to read the article. Apple copied Microsoft, Microsoft copied Apple, and the GNU/Linux desktop community copied them both. So what? It's human nature to copy others.
* I feel weird linking to my own post, but I don't really have anything new to say on the subject.
"I've had accounts on POSIX-compliant systems for years. I've found that with only user-level access I'm quite able to compile or install applications for my own user account in my own home directory without much difficulty, and still maintain the system integrity. As long as Microsoft holds on to the registry they'll never achieve such."
You obviosuly don't know much about the Windows or it's registry.
Storage mediums are for half-wits. I keep my source code in my head. To upload and test my work, I dial up to my AOL account using my AT&T rotary phone and emulate the tones of a 28,800 baud modem using my voice.