That's why I don't support Suse, Lindows, Xandros, or UnitedLinux. Taking an entirely opensource group of software and then dropping a small fraction of proprietary code that if removed cripples the distro or prevents redistribution is something I don't believe in and try not to support. Using your example of what Apple did, at least they did it right. They used BSD software properly and thankfully didn't try to hijack linux which is what the above companies are more concerned with. I've gotten flamed in the past for complaining about Suse in particular, but considering how Redhat and Mandrake opensource some very good gui admin tools, Suse just ends up looking stupid for the way they treat Yast.
It's a hard line to walk. On one hand I believe the core distro should be free but at the same time you should be able to run whatever closed source apps you want on top of that. For example I would have no problem running a port of Photoshop on Debian, but I would never support a proprietary version of APT no matter how well it worked. I also REALLY don't like companies basing their distro on Debian and then adding a lot of proprietary crap and preventing distribution. That really makes no sense and I always write the companies telling them they should have used one of the BSD's instead.
My logic may be flawed but that's just the way I feel. If the future of linux is distros in which many parts become proprietary and they all cost money then I'll just use something else. It's not about being cheap either. Its about having a quality free OS available that truly belongs to the community and is above commercial interests.
The purpose of the conference is quoted below. Its a vague description as best.
"This conference is designed to discuss best practices, raise awareness and the share experiences among policy makers from the U.S. and Europe. The conference will draw participants from local, national and international organizations from the public, private and academic sectors."
But knowing that the purpose of eGov(from what I can gather from their crappy website) is to boost Open Source, I don't understand why they would allow a company to participate who is against real open source. MS is a advocate of shared source not Open Source I see no reason why they should be allowed to go the conference. I don't see any reason for flaming or being nasty about it, but it seems pretty clear cut to me. Being that MS is actively trying to get governments NOT to use open source why give them a platform to espouse their views? Mr. Stanco says its about Free Speech, I say it must be something else. A new building for GW.U in a few years perhaps?
Just because Free Software is about choice doesn't mean you have to give your enemy "equal opportunity" to destroy you. Trust me, if this was a Microsoft conference they would not let linux advocates come so that potentials customers could get fair and balanced information from the "other point of view".
In the end if MS is allowed to go it will only hurt the conference, Open Source, and the credibility of eGovOS. It will only help MS in their goal of perverting the message of Open Source.
O.K. to add a "little" melodrama, this is like the NAACP allowing the KKK to speak at their national conference. In short it just sounds like a dumb idea.
It's cool that the engine is gpl'd (think we'll ever actually see a really good game using it?), but the screen shots for this particular game don't look that great to me. It looks like something from 1999. The terrain looks decent, but the character is god-awful looking. Really generic and jaggy.
To me this just proves that the remedy isn't working
There was some sort of remedy? I remember the U.S. court system said something like "The world is yours to do with as you wish". But I don't remember anything about an actual remedy.
"If MS didn't support all the basics then I'd care. But since they do and then some"
That sound of laughing you hear is the rest of the Internet who just read that someone said "MS supports the basics". IE partially supports real standards from 5 years ago and is lacking in support for modern standards compared to Opera and Mozilla.
"If Mozilla/Opera can't be bothered to invent a little like MS is doing then oh well."
They should deviate from real published standards so that when a webmaster uses them IE is now broken? Nice logic.
O.K. use mutt then;), but at the same time its a very common linux email client fitting in with the example of popular linux email apps that won't cause the same type havoc Outlook did/does. Part of this would be due to Pine and part of it is due to linux having a better design from a security standpoint than Windows does. As your aware I'm sure its just very unlikely that we will ever see the type of email viruses on Linux that you do on windows. On windows without a virus scanner, you as good as dead. Hell you don't even have to open the email sometimes for it to drop off its payload.
On further thought if linux every becomes as popular as windows on the client side there is no doubt in my mind that linux vendors would still wipe the floor compared to MS products. Think about it. With little manpower and many times shoestrings budgets look at what we do now. Now think about the distros having oodles of cash to spend on security. Things would be a LOT different than they are now.
Possibly, but considering how Apache soundly outnumbers IIS installs for webserving, where are all the Apache worms? Oh sure there have been some problems with Apache, but compared to "which worm is it this week" IIS, Apache is a solid as a rock. Where does that arguement about installed base stand now? That default answer MS users give about installed base is bunk. Open Source compared to MS software is flat out more secure. I doubt you will ever see the day when Linux email clients like Pine or Evolution start causing billions in damage each year like Outlook does.
The methods I described work for most people, and editting you apt sources list and running one command isn't really that big a hassle. For an apt gui there is also something called synaptic. With it you can see what you can install, do updates etc. http://distro.conectiva.com.br/projetos/46/
It really doesn't get any easier than that especially compared just getting linux installed and setup in the first place. If you still think getting kde is too hard, then I suspect you have real bias against KDE. That's fine as well, but you should be honest about it.;)
Your not an idiot, but any moron could just select KDE at install or later on through the nifty add/remove system tool. For future versions, you can a) wait for KDE to put up rpms and then just rpm -Uvh *(or whatever) or b)apt-get it from http://kde-redhat.sourceforge.net/ I know what your saying about the ease of installing Ximian, but using KDE for comparsion was a really bad example.
He's right, ATI has really only gotten its act together with drivers in the past3-6 months. Up till then it was one buggy driver after another. For most people the nvidia drivers just worked while it seemed that with every ATI driver release you ended up needing patches for every game to work right. That said at this point it does seem like ATI finally got things right with the 9700. Up till now I honestly wouldn't even consider an ATI card, but compared to the initial FX I don't see why you choose it over the 9700. The more I read about it, it seems like Cost, noise, and loss of a pci slot will be keeping me away from the FX. Right now I have a 4200 and by the summer I'll be ready for a new card. If Nvidia doesn't get its FX in line by then there's no doubt I'll jump to ATI.
The sound difference is pretty amazing. And judging from the Sapphiretech card its at least possible to use a quiet alternative method of cooling. Looking at the FX I don't see how that's going to be an option. Couple the sound problem with the loss of a pci slot, performance that isn't significantly faster, and cost, I don't see how you could buy an FX over a 9700 right now. Of course I haven't paid attention to how the 9700 works on linux, but for windows use the 9700 seems to be the no brainer.
If you *really* want to help out...why not join the peacecorps and due a tour of Africa?
People could go on and on about more "worthy" causes. Let the KDE people request some help without trying to guilt others into donating to a different cause.
Morons gave MS an award. This now validates MS as company that plays nice with OpenSource and Linux. This of course is false as we all know MS is doing its best to destroy linux and every linux company. Someone there pointed out how MS is distributing GPL software with their kit. This fact means jack no matter how ironic it is. What does mean jack is that MS will with its billion dollar marketing budget will turn this award to their advantage in their quest to ruin linux.
I see the trend here lately is to bash people who bash MS. Well maybe sometimes that's called for. Let's not forget the facts though, Microsoft is literally trying to wipe linux from the face of the earth.(I'd like to see someone argue with that fact) This award will only help them in that endevor, thus I think my calling them morons is in this case justified.
BTW incase anyone notices, I posted something similar at the newsforge site but it might not show up , so I reposted here.
"but I would rather support a network that doesn't foist spyware "
So basically your saying your giving the moral highground to a service that is "better" for committing priacy and copyright infringement as opposed to one that fosters spyware?
Seeing all this, I guess I understand why the linux version is so slow. I know people who say it run O.K. for them, but in my experience I just don't bother and stick with RTCW since it a)has excellant performance under linux and b) was designed from the ground up to be openGL
Well if it gives you any comfort, UT2003 runs about 40% slower on linux than on windows at the same resolution and settings. The UT engine was designed from the ground up as a Direct3D thang. OpenGL is only and afterthought, ie hack. Even more interesting was UT2003 is really just an offshoot of Unreal Championship for Xbox. Orginally there was going to be NO game for the PC. So keeping in mind UT2003 for linux uses the OpenGL hack, only came about because they were already doing an OS X port, the OS X versoin was ported from a PC version that was originally supposed to even be made. Seeing all this, I gu
" the fonts used in the mozilla browsing experience just suck! i hear you can get fully anti-aliased fonts working on linux but it seems to be a bit of a chore...."
Are you asking about AA in linux in general or in Mozilla? Because for Linux, obviously as you know you can use Redhat. All the other vendors are sure to follow in the next year releasing distros that finally don't have shitty fonts. Hell within the next few years even Debian may ship with decent fonts "out of the box". If your talking about getting Mozilla AA going in RH 8.0, then its moron proof.
What you mean RealPlayer 8 isn't the only Linux Media Player you ever use? Hell why would you need anything else? Afterall, considering how often its updated and the great support Real gives to use Linux users on the client side who could ask for anything else?
Those Morons at Real have the whole Linux desktop to themselves since Apple and MS ignore us. All they have to do is work on a modern Media Player for Linux and they would own the entire market. Hell if they just ported RealOne they would win a lot more users. RealOne Enterprise isn't a bad product and I'd sure like to have it over the aging Realplayer 8.
But I guess that, let alone hoping for a even newer client is wishful thinking.
Slashdot Mirror
That's why I don't support Suse, Lindows, Xandros, or UnitedLinux. Taking an entirely opensource group of software and then dropping a small fraction of proprietary code that if removed cripples the distro or prevents redistribution is something I don't believe in and try not to support. Using your example of what Apple did, at least they did it right. They used BSD software properly and thankfully didn't try to hijack linux which is what the above companies are more concerned with. I've gotten flamed in the past for complaining about Suse in particular, but considering how Redhat and Mandrake opensource some very good gui admin tools, Suse just ends up looking stupid for the way they treat Yast.
It's a hard line to walk. On one hand I believe the core distro should be free but at the same time you should be able to run whatever closed source apps you want on top of that. For example I would have no problem running a port of Photoshop on Debian, but I would never support a proprietary version of APT no matter how well it worked. I also REALLY don't like companies basing their distro on Debian and then adding a lot of proprietary crap and preventing distribution. That really makes no sense and I always write the companies telling them they should have used one of the BSD's instead.
My logic may be flawed but that's just the way I feel. If the future of linux is distros in which many parts become proprietary and they all cost money then I'll just use something else. It's not about being cheap either. Its about having a quality free OS available that truly belongs to the community and is above commercial interests.
I'd wager most /.ers don't even get that joke.
nt
The purpose of the conference is quoted below. Its a vague description as best.
"This conference is designed to discuss best practices, raise awareness and the share experiences among policy makers from the U.S. and Europe. The conference will draw participants from local, national and international organizations from the public, private and academic sectors."
But knowing that the purpose of eGov(from what I can gather from their crappy website) is to boost Open Source, I don't understand why they would allow a company to participate who is against real open source. MS is a advocate of shared source not Open Source I see no reason why they should be allowed to go the conference. I don't see any reason for flaming or being nasty about it, but it seems pretty clear cut to me. Being that MS is actively trying to get governments NOT to use open source why give them a platform to espouse their views? Mr. Stanco says its about Free Speech, I say it must be something else. A new building for GW.U in a few years perhaps?
Just because Free Software is about choice doesn't mean you have to give your enemy "equal opportunity" to destroy you. Trust me, if this was a Microsoft conference they would not let linux advocates come so that potentials customers could get fair and balanced information from the "other point of view".
In the end if MS is allowed to go it will only hurt the conference, Open Source, and the credibility of eGovOS. It will only help MS in their goal of perverting the message of Open Source.
O.K. to add a "little" melodrama, this is like the NAACP allowing the KKK to speak at their national conference. In short it just sounds like a dumb idea.
It's cool that the engine is gpl'd (think we'll ever actually see a really good game using it?), but the screen shots for this particular game don't look that great to me. It looks like something from 1999. The terrain looks decent, but the character is god-awful looking. Really generic and jaggy.
Yes, Homer's theory of a donut shaped universe is a lot more plausible. ;)
Is immigrants swimming BACK to where they came from.
Anyone know of any tech jobs in Cuba?
nt
To me this just proves that the remedy isn't working
There was some sort of remedy? I remember the U.S. court system said something like "The world is yours to do with as you wish". But I don't remember anything about an actual remedy.
"If MS didn't support all the basics then I'd care. But since they do and then some"
That sound of laughing you hear is the rest of the Internet who just read that someone said "MS supports the basics". IE partially supports real standards from 5 years ago and is lacking in support for modern standards compared to Opera and Mozilla.
"If Mozilla/Opera can't be bothered to invent a little like MS is doing then oh well."
They should deviate from real published standards so that when a webmaster uses them IE is now broken? Nice logic.
O.K. use mutt then ;), but at the same time its a very common linux email client fitting in with the example of popular linux email apps that won't cause the same type havoc Outlook did/does. Part of this would be due to Pine and part of it is due to linux having a better design from a security standpoint than Windows does. As your aware I'm sure its just very unlikely that we will ever see the type of email viruses on Linux that you do on windows. On windows without a virus scanner, you as good as dead. Hell you don't even have to open the email sometimes for it to drop off its payload.
On further thought if linux every becomes as popular as windows on the client side there is no doubt in my mind that linux vendors would still wipe the floor compared to MS products. Think about it. With little manpower and many times shoestrings budgets look at what we do now. Now think about the distros having oodles of cash to spend on security. Things would be a LOT different than they are now.
Possibly, but considering how Apache soundly outnumbers IIS installs for webserving, where are all the Apache worms? Oh sure there have been some problems with Apache, but compared to "which worm is it this week" IIS, Apache is a solid as a rock. Where does that arguement about installed base stand now? That default answer MS users give about installed base is bunk. Open Source compared to MS software is flat out more secure. I doubt you will ever see the day when Linux email clients like Pine or Evolution start causing billions in damage each year like Outlook does.
The methods I described work for most people, and editting you apt sources list and running one command isn't really that big a hassle. For an apt gui there is also something called synaptic. With it you can see what you can install, do updates etc.
;)
http://distro.conectiva.com.br/projetos/46/
It really doesn't get any easier than that especially compared just getting linux installed and setup in the first place. If you still think getting kde is too hard, then I suspect you have real bias against KDE. That's fine as well, but you should be honest about it.
Your not an idiot, but any moron could just select KDE at install or later on through the nifty add/remove system tool. For future versions, you can a) wait for KDE to put up rpms and then just rpm -Uvh *(or whatever) or b)apt-get it from http://kde-redhat.sourceforge.net/
I know what your saying about the ease of installing Ximian, but using KDE for comparsion was a really bad example.
He's right, ATI has really only gotten its act together with drivers in the past3-6 months. Up till then it was one buggy driver after another. For most people the nvidia drivers just worked while it seemed that with every ATI driver release you ended up needing patches for every game to work right. That said at this point it does seem like ATI finally got things right with the 9700. Up till now I honestly wouldn't even consider an ATI card, but compared to the initial FX I don't see why you choose it over the 9700. The more I read about it, it seems like Cost, noise, and loss of a pci slot will be keeping me away from the FX. Right now I have a 4200 and by the summer I'll be ready for a new card. If Nvidia doesn't get its FX in line by then there's no doubt I'll jump to ATI.
Besides the fact the leaked alpha ran like crap on your friends GF2, essentially your proof comes down to this.
"but you should be pretty good to go I would imagine."
Somehow I don't feel any better.
The sound difference is pretty amazing. And judging from the Sapphiretech card its at least possible to use a quiet alternative method of cooling. Looking at the FX I don't see how that's going to be an option. Couple the sound problem with the loss of a pci slot, performance that isn't significantly faster, and cost, I don't see how you could buy an FX over a 9700 right now. Of course I haven't paid attention to how the 9700 works on linux, but for windows use the 9700 seems to be the no brainer.
If you *really* want to help out...why not join the peacecorps and due a tour of Africa?
People could go on and on about more "worthy" causes. Let the KDE people request some help without trying to guilt others into donating to a different cause.
Morons gave MS an award. This now validates MS as company that plays nice with OpenSource and Linux. This of course is false as we all know MS is doing its best to destroy linux and every linux company. Someone there pointed out how MS is distributing GPL software with their kit. This fact means jack no matter how ironic it is. What does mean jack is that MS will with its billion dollar marketing budget will turn this award to their advantage in their quest to ruin linux.
I see the trend here lately is to bash people who bash MS. Well maybe sometimes that's called for. Let's not forget the facts though, Microsoft is literally trying to wipe linux from the face of the earth.(I'd like to see someone argue with that fact) This award will only help them in that endevor, thus I think my calling them morons is in this case justified.
BTW incase anyone notices, I posted something similar at the newsforge site but it might not show up , so I reposted here.
"but I would rather support a network that doesn't foist spyware "
So basically your saying your giving the moral highground to a service that is "better" for committing priacy and copyright infringement as opposed to one that fosters spyware?
Seeing all this, I guess I understand why the linux version is so slow. I know people who say it run O.K. for them, but in my experience I just don't bother and stick with RTCW since it a)has excellant performance under linux and b) was designed from the ground up to be openGL
Well if it gives you any comfort, UT2003 runs about 40% slower on linux than on windows at the same resolution and settings. The UT engine was designed from the ground up as a Direct3D thang. OpenGL is only and afterthought, ie hack. Even more interesting was UT2003 is really just an offshoot of Unreal Championship for Xbox. Orginally there was going to be NO game for the PC. So keeping in mind UT2003 for linux uses the OpenGL hack, only came about because they were already doing an OS X port, the OS X versoin was ported from a PC version that was originally supposed to even be made. Seeing all this, I gu
He's an asshole. All he does now is try to shit on the Mozilla project and make it look bad. Have a look at his blog, he's a bitter douchebag.
Re: his sarcastic "review on the state of linux video". Fuck him, stick with Windows next time.
There, now my comments are on the same level as his.
" the fonts used in the mozilla browsing experience just suck! i hear you can get fully anti-aliased fonts working on linux but it seems to be a bit of a chore...."
i ll a1.2.1/Red_Hat_8x_RPMS/xft/RPMS/i386/
Are you asking about AA in linux in general or in Mozilla? Because for Linux, obviously as you know you can use Redhat. All the other vendors are sure to follow in the next year releasing distros that finally don't have shitty fonts. Hell within the next few years even Debian may ship with decent fonts "out of the box".
If your talking about getting Mozilla AA going in RH 8.0, then its moron proof.
http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/releases/moz
What you mean RealPlayer 8 isn't the only Linux Media Player you ever use? Hell why would you need anything else? Afterall, considering how often its updated and the great support Real gives to use Linux users on the client side who could ask for anything else?
Those Morons at Real have the whole Linux desktop to themselves since Apple and MS ignore us. All they have to do is work on a modern Media Player for Linux and they would own the entire market. Hell if they just ported RealOne they would win a lot more users. RealOne Enterprise isn't a bad product and I'd sure like to have it over the aging Realplayer 8.
But I guess that, let alone hoping for a even newer client is wishful thinking.