Meh, this isn't 1996. We all can read pdf files on our Linux boxes. While html is always preferred for links, there is no need to call the file a "troll link".
Let's see if RedHat 8.0 works as a business desktop, its STATED target.
Easy for admin to deploy. check Easy to use desktop even for a windows user. check Comes with a great Office Suite and email client. check Comes with a fast stable web browser. check The best fonts and font tool ever for a linux distro. check Absolutly 100% free to download ISO's. check A billion times more secure than Outlook/IE. check Responsive on modern(1GHz 256MB) machines. check Companies has given/gives back a LOT to the community. check
I've been using Redhat since 5.0 and I've also pretty much every distro under the sun. For desktop linux this is a high wark mark. It still has a few rough edges when it comes to consumer usage, but really for the business desktop this is deployable NOW. If I were starting a company today there is not doubt RH 8 would be my choice regardless of cost. Also remember this is Redhat's FIRST attempt at the desktop. I can only imagine how good Redhat 8.1 or 8.2 is going to be.
Yea because opening a single 2MB html is likely....
For general web browsing on my cable connection Moz is always just as faster and sometimes faster than IE.
Lets take a real world example shall we.
I just loaded foxnews.com on IE it took about 6.25 seconds to load. On Moz it took about 4.5. Oh, IE will do its best by throwing whatever meager bits of code it get up first, but the entire page loads faster in Mozilla.
www.time.com Mozilla 4 seconds, IE 5 seconds. www.merck.com Mozilla 4.5, IE 4.75
The point is your example is a red herring.
"the difference in rendering speed alone is incredible - IE kicks Moz's ass."
You gotta pay to play period, I don't think it has anything to do with being an elitist. If you want to be a gamer and not have to upgrade your video card you'll be relegated to playing older games at 640x480. If you want to blame someone blame the game designers who create the games which require ever increasing graphics and cpu horsepower. And to be honest with you I actually don't even think its fair to blame them. The game designers are just trying to produce the best looking games possible. They are literally just using the technology that is available to them. You can't expect them to give up on all graphical progress just so people with Geforce 1's can continue to play every game at 1024x768.
I can also completlely relate to how much it sucks to have to upgrade your hardware so often. But like I said that's the price you pay for being a gamer. This is NOT a cheap hobby. I don't know where people got the idea that gaming is a cheap hobby. I assume its a relic from the mid 1990's when the pre hardware accelerated games didn't require the latest and great videocard, but those days are long gone. These days it's a 24 month cycle for older games and a 12-16 month cycle for the latest FPS's. Of course like I said you can turn all the options down, but who wants to play games at 800x600 on a 19" monitor?
you said it. If you need 3D ATI gets ruled out. Its too bad, since this weekend I could have bought a ATI 8500LE 128MB for only $99 at Compusa, but knowing that I'd like the option to be able to play UT2003 or Doom III when it comes out, I'm going to be spending $40 more and buying a GF4 4200.
What ever happened to that project funded by the weather channel to make a DRI driver? When its done is anyone even going to be buying these cards anymore?
Holy crap my spell checker sucks. Meaning my brain. Every time I spit out a post here and later read it back I'm agast at the basic spelling errors and words that get left out. It's like in my mind I've already sounded it all out, but the fingers do their own thing and skip entire words.
That's all, just thought I'd remark in case someone else is as shocked as I am about the poor grammer and spelling on my posts.
First off let me say 1) don't usually like Eugina or her opinions and 2) I'm a big RedHat backer.
That said the review seemed pretty fair to me. She's write in saying multiple menus or counterproductive. I mean either include an app under the main area or don't include it. There should NOT be duplicate subcategories on the menu. Can you imagine if Windows XP shipped with the Acessories menu listed twice?
Second, regarding multimedia. If its multimedia abilities are as castrated as she's says, that's a big negative against RedHat 8.0. I still can't believe and MP3 player isn't included. As if that lets them off the hook for years of including an MP3 in every RedHat release?! Now Out of the Box multimedia is broken, which won't stop me, but will stop the average user who has never used linux before. There should dam well be a single button you click that restores MP3 ability. Making a user try to figure out how to get MP3 back into XMMS is NOT user friendly.
Lastly while obvisouly most people are not running at the resolutions mentioned in the article, having something as basic as being able to change your refresh rate ala Corel linux should be standard by now. It actually quite pathetic that its not.
Anyway, I'm downloading it now so we'll see how it goes. The one thing I am looking forward to is decent fonts for once. If they get that right I can probably forgive the other things.
I surprised you didn't say if you were fired or not, but just FYI, wrongful termination can be a real bitch to prove.
Regarding when to call a lawyer. If you think you may possibly be charged with a crime, you call a lawyer period. No decent lawyer will not take 5 minutes and listen to your case. You will most likely be told to call back when and if the authorities are going to move against you. If and when that happens you pay a retainer and then go from there. If any lawyer asks for money up front, run away.
Regarding money, if you truly did nothing wrong you would most likely recoup your legal costs in a summary judgement before the case even got to court. Contrary to popular belief most cases do NOT go to court. They are settled either by an arbitrator or judge before hand.
As always IANAL but my father is, and I worked at his firm for several years.
Your using the wrong tool, you should be using Remote Assitance not Remote Desktop. RDC is designed specifically for single use only. If you want to work with someone you should be using Remote Assistance.
The RDP protocol or Windows terminal service is also plently secure so I don't know what's not "trustworthy" about it. Lastly its a hell of a lot faster then any version of VNC over modem, lan whatever Period. Its just no contest.
Don't get me wrong I like and use VNC and when using linux or any other non-MS OS its what I use, but for a windows network, Terminal services or Remote Assitance etc is where its at.
Although its hard to tell, it looks like the AOL client is running on Wine. If that's the case whoopdee f**kin doo. Also I guess since the AOL client runs on windows that makes windows "AOL's" PC as well. The author of the article is clueless, he basically says that for the first time you don't need the windows or mac OS and how great this is. Well no you don't moron, but you still nee the Linux OS. Its not like AOL boots from a Cdrom and an underlying OS isn't necessary. THAT would be an AOL PC.
Lindows PR strikes again. Redhat et al sure as hell have alot to learn from them. I bet more consumers know about Lindows then Redhat which is just mindblowing.
You'll excuse the rest of us who are tired of hearing about an OS where the all of the important parts are proprietary and requires and expense hardware platform to boot. Then of course there is Apple itself which treats its users like crap and makes MS(shudder) look benevolent. I tired of this Apple is a good guy crap.
So whatever mod me as troll, but know in the end OS X being nix based does nothing for the opensource desktop because there is nothing opensource about the parts of the Apple desktop that count. What happens if X company does the same thing to linux? Say they do the same thing and throw a proprietary desktop that solves all of linux's problems. Will it be a win when all of the linux desktop vendors go out of business because some commercial company co-opted linux? Thanks but no thanks. I'll "Struggle" a little while longer with my Truly Free desktop.
Redhat also has most of those features. Regarding cost, well since Suse doesn't pay for most for the people's work that they are distributing with their distro, I don't feel like paying for Suse's work either.
Way to stir up the pot Slashdot. Just what we needed, Thanks!!!
Of course what do the editiors care? They just light the fuse and walk away. It the bystanders who end up getting hurt.
Now this useless blown up story about a developer who disagreed with his employer will spread all around the internet.
I look forward to tomorrow's frontpage of Cnet, NY Times etc where they all say the entire opensource community has turned on Redhat. And also how the split between Gnome and KDE is ripping the community apart, and maybe a little Linux is too fragmented FUD as well.
That's the worst site ever. Its like a mirror for slashdot except only the worst of. There literally are no resonable people there. Take for example a post yesterday where some guy said XP sucks for wireless and a bunch of us rebuked him. That would never happen there. Its a one way street. Every post is "linux sucks" and if a non-MS product is ever mentioned all they do is crap all over it. Truly Sad.
"So it's frontpages fault that mozilla can't display the html it generates?"
In a word, Yes.
If Mozilla were to code for every quirk that is IE specific, they would be recreating IE, and who wants to do that? You also even if you wanted to can't do this on a crossplatform level, because IE isn't a truely crossplatform browser.
"Making mozilla compatible with real life websites is its best hope for the future"
Somehow I think Mozilla is doing just fine. Warping an Internet browser to fit Microsoft's vision of the web is what IE is for, you'll excuse Mozilla if they don't want to contribute to a Microsoft only web.
It sounds to me like you should just stick to using IE, you'll be a lot happier.
But you don't and they do. If someone will make it their life's mission to fuck you in ever possible way without relent for all of their existence, would you bother messing with them.
In others its the American way personified, money buys justice, and he with the most money wins.
I used to sneer at blanket statements like that, but anyone who disagrees at this point is living in LaLa-Land.
Read my reply to Zebbers below. Besides sending an attached file via email the computer novice probably hasn't uploaded anything in their life. My post was for neophytes and I stand by the anecdote. The way you think is not the way joe consumer thinks.
"However, youre comment about uploading is rather stupid. One of, if not the main reason digital rocks...is the ability to just go home, look at, edit and CHOOSE which ones you want printed. If your just gonna shoot and print all 24/36 whatever...you might as well shoot film. "
Its hardly a stupid comment, and is in fact one of the first things people realize once they've bought a digital camera is how long uploading takes,and much much paper and ink cost. Your forgetting how cheap these cameras are now. Many families browsing Walmart or Compusa just think "oh neat" and buy a camera thinking it can replace their traditional 35mm, and then realize there is a downside. Obvious you and I know better, but someone buying their first digital camera probably doesn't.
"Unless your a serious photographer a 2.1MP with a good optical zoom..."
The reason is an optical zoom truely magnifies the subject, while a digital zoom just blows up the same area and doesn't really optically magnify it. This can often result in a blurry picture. So in otherwords, don't user digital zoom.
for anyone in the market for a digital camera. Unless you a serious photographer a 2.1MP with a good zoomable optical lens will work fine for most people. Having 3MP can't hurt, but anything beyond that is overkill(financially) for most people.
Ask yourself this. How many 8x10 photos have you made and kept in the past few years? If your like the average consumer and do 4x6's and 5x8 's a good 2.1MP will do you well.
Plus keep in mind that A) you will need a high speed connection if you want to upload your photos to an online printer. My father realized that after buying a 3MP and trying to upload a roll of 30 via a 56k line which as we all know only does 33.6 up. Also realize that B) printing your own photos is very expensive and between the ink and paper really burn money.
So while its all good and well that these higher MP camera are coming out, the cost of the camera can really sometime be minimal over the other expenses you may incur.
Slashdot Mirror
He's not saying that he thinks it will make him MORE objective. He's questioning if he CAN be objective.
Meh, this isn't 1996. We all can read pdf files on our Linux boxes. While html is always preferred for links, there is no need to call the file a "troll link".
Let's see if RedHat 8.0 works as a business desktop, its STATED target.
Easy for admin to deploy. check
Easy to use desktop even for a windows user. check
Comes with a great Office Suite and email client. check
Comes with a fast stable web browser. check
The best fonts and font tool ever for a linux distro. check
Absolutly 100% free to download ISO's. check
A billion times more secure than Outlook/IE. check
Responsive on modern(1GHz 256MB) machines. check
Companies has given/gives back a LOT to the community. check
I've been using Redhat since 5.0 and I've also pretty much every distro under the sun. For desktop linux this is a high wark mark. It still has a few rough edges when it comes to consumer usage, but really for the business desktop this is deployable NOW. If I were starting a company today there is not doubt RH 8 would be my choice regardless of cost. Also remember this is Redhat's FIRST attempt at the desktop. I can only imagine how good Redhat 8.1 or 8.2 is going to be.
Yea because opening a single 2MB html is likely....
For general web browsing on my cable connection Moz is always just as faster and sometimes faster than IE.
Lets take a real world example shall we.
I just loaded foxnews.com on IE it took about 6.25 seconds to load. On Moz it took about 4.5. Oh, IE will do its best by throwing whatever meager bits of code it get up first, but the entire page loads faster in Mozilla.
www.time.com Mozilla 4 seconds, IE 5 seconds.
www.merck.com Mozilla 4.5, IE 4.75
The point is your example is a red herring.
"the difference in rendering speed alone is incredible - IE kicks Moz's ass."
Apparantly not.
You gotta pay to play period, I don't think it has anything to do with being an elitist. If you want to be a gamer and not have to upgrade your video card you'll be relegated to playing older games at 640x480. If you want to blame someone blame the game designers who create the games which require ever increasing graphics and cpu horsepower. And to be honest with you I actually don't even think its fair to blame them. The game designers are just trying to produce the best looking games possible. They are literally just using the technology that is available to them. You can't expect them to give up on all graphical progress just so people with Geforce 1's can continue to play every game at 1024x768.
I can also completlely relate to how much it sucks to have to upgrade your hardware so often. But like I said that's the price you pay for being a gamer. This is NOT a cheap hobby. I don't know where people got the idea that gaming is a cheap hobby. I assume its a relic from the mid 1990's when the pre hardware accelerated games didn't require the latest and great videocard, but those days are long gone. These days it's a 24 month cycle for older games and a 12-16 month cycle for the latest FPS's. Of course like I said you can turn all the options down, but who wants to play games at 800x600 on a 19" monitor?
you said it. If you need 3D ATI gets ruled out. Its too bad, since this weekend I could have bought a ATI 8500LE 128MB for only $99 at Compusa, but knowing that I'd like the option to be able to play UT2003 or Doom III when it comes out, I'm going to be spending $40 more and buying a GF4 4200.
What ever happened to that project funded by the weather channel to make a DRI driver? When its done is anyone even going to be buying these cards anymore?
Holy crap my spell checker sucks. Meaning my brain. Every time I spit out a post here and later read it back I'm agast at the basic spelling errors and words that get left out. It's like in my mind I've already sounded it all out, but the fingers do their own thing and skip entire words.
That's all, just thought I'd remark in case someone else is as shocked as I am about the poor grammer and spelling on my posts.
First off let me say 1) don't usually like Eugina or her opinions and 2) I'm a big RedHat backer.
That said the review seemed pretty fair to me. She's write in saying multiple menus or counterproductive. I mean either include an app under the main area or don't include it. There should NOT be duplicate subcategories on the menu. Can you imagine if Windows XP shipped with the Acessories menu listed twice?
Second, regarding multimedia. If its multimedia abilities are as castrated as she's says, that's a big negative against RedHat 8.0. I still can't believe and MP3 player isn't included. As if that lets them off the hook for years of including an MP3 in every RedHat release?! Now Out of the Box multimedia is broken, which won't stop me, but will stop the average user who has never used linux before. There should dam well be a single button you click that restores MP3 ability. Making a user try to figure out how to get MP3 back into XMMS is NOT user friendly.
Lastly while obvisouly most people are not running at the resolutions mentioned in the article, having something as basic as being able to change your refresh rate ala Corel linux should be standard by now. It actually quite pathetic that its not.
Anyway, I'm downloading it now so we'll see how it goes. The one thing I am looking forward to is decent fonts for once. If they get that right I can probably forgive the other things.
I surprised you didn't say if you were fired or not, but just FYI, wrongful termination can be a real bitch to prove.
Regarding when to call a lawyer. If you think you may possibly be charged with a crime, you call a lawyer period. No decent lawyer will not take 5 minutes and listen to your case. You will most likely be told to call back when and if the authorities are going to move against you. If and when that happens you pay a retainer and then go from there. If any lawyer asks for money up front, run away.
Regarding money, if you truly did nothing wrong you would most likely recoup your legal costs in a summary judgement before the case even got to court. Contrary to popular belief most cases do NOT go to court. They are settled either by an arbitrator or judge before hand.
As always IANAL but my father is, and I worked at his firm for several years.
Your using the wrong tool, you should be using Remote Assitance not Remote Desktop. RDC is designed specifically for single use only. If you want to work with someone you should be using Remote Assistance.
The RDP protocol or Windows terminal service is also plently secure so I don't know what's not "trustworthy" about it. Lastly its a hell of a lot faster then any version of VNC over modem, lan whatever Period. Its just no contest.
Don't get me wrong I like and use VNC and when using linux or any other non-MS OS its what I use, but for a windows network, Terminal services or Remote Assitance etc is where its at.
Just wondering since all of the good desktop parts of OSX are proprietary, would you bother running Darwin if you can't use the OSX desktop.
Has anyone out there switched from FreeBSD, OpenBSD or NetBSD to Darwin? Do you think its better? Why etc.
You mod something as overrated when its been modded up by others and you disagree with that, not when 2 is someones starting score.
Although its hard to tell, it looks like the AOL client is running on Wine. If that's the case whoopdee f**kin doo. Also I guess since the AOL client runs on windows that makes windows "AOL's" PC as well. The author of the article is clueless, he basically says that for the first time you don't need the windows or mac OS and how great this is. Well no you don't moron, but you still nee the Linux OS. Its not like AOL boots from a Cdrom and an underlying OS isn't necessary. THAT would be an AOL PC.
Lindows PR strikes again. Redhat et al sure as hell have alot to learn from them. I bet more consumers know about Lindows then Redhat which is just mindblowing.
You'll excuse the rest of us who are tired of hearing about an OS where the all of the important parts are proprietary and requires and expense hardware platform to boot. Then of course there is Apple itself which treats its users like crap and makes MS(shudder) look benevolent. I tired of this Apple is a good guy crap.
So whatever mod me as troll, but know in the end OS X being nix based does nothing for the opensource desktop because there is nothing opensource about the parts of the Apple desktop that count. What happens if X company does the same thing to linux? Say they do the same thing and throw a proprietary desktop that solves all of linux's problems. Will it be a win when all of the linux desktop vendors go out of business because some commercial company co-opted linux? Thanks but no thanks. I'll "Struggle" a little while longer with my Truly Free desktop.
Redhat gives out free ISO's and Suse does not.
Redhat also has most of those features. Regarding cost, well since Suse doesn't pay for most for the people's work that they are distributing with their distro, I don't feel like paying for Suse's work either.
Way to stir up the pot Slashdot. Just what we needed, Thanks!!!
Of course what do the editiors care? They just light the fuse and walk away. It the bystanders who end up getting hurt.
Now this useless blown up story about a developer who disagreed with his employer will spread all around the internet.
I look forward to tomorrow's frontpage of Cnet, NY Times etc where they all say the entire opensource community has turned on Redhat. And also how the split between Gnome and KDE is ripping the community apart, and maybe a little Linux is too fragmented FUD as well.
Did I say thanks already?
That's the worst site ever. Its like a mirror for slashdot except only the worst of. There literally are no resonable people there. Take for example a post yesterday where some guy said XP sucks for wireless and a bunch of us rebuked him. That would never happen there. Its a one way street. Every post is "linux sucks" and if a non-MS product is ever mentioned all they do is crap all over it. Truly Sad.
"So it's frontpages fault that mozilla can't display the html it generates?"
In a word, Yes.
If Mozilla were to code for every quirk that is IE specific, they would be recreating IE, and who wants to do that? You also even if you wanted to can't do this on a crossplatform level, because IE isn't a truely crossplatform browser.
"Making mozilla compatible with real life websites is its best hope for the future"
Somehow I think Mozilla is doing just fine. Warping an Internet browser to fit Microsoft's vision of the web is what IE is for, you'll excuse Mozilla if they don't want to contribute to a Microsoft only web.
It sounds to me like you should just stick to using IE, you'll be a lot happier.
Linux is a Cancer!
We'll stomp on Linux!
I'm taking my ball and going home!
How embarassing for Microsoft, their CEO sounds like a ranting 3 year old. Time for a timeout.
"If I had the money "
But you don't and they do. If someone will make it their life's mission to fuck you in ever possible way without relent for all of their existence, would you bother messing with them.
In others its the American way personified, money buys justice, and he with the most money wins.
I used to sneer at blanket statements like that, but anyone who disagrees at this point is living in LaLa-Land.
Looks like the MCP from Tron drank some green beer. :-)
Read my reply to Zebbers below. Besides sending an attached file via email the computer novice probably hasn't uploaded anything in their life. My post was for neophytes and I stand by the anecdote. The way you think is not the way joe consumer thinks.
"However, youre comment about uploading is rather stupid. One of, if not the main reason digital rocks...is the ability to just go home, look at, edit and CHOOSE which ones you want printed. If your just gonna shoot and print all 24/36 whatever...you might as well shoot film. "
Its hardly a stupid comment, and is in fact one of the first things people realize once they've bought a digital camera is how long uploading takes,and much much paper and ink cost. Your forgetting how cheap these cameras are now. Many families browsing Walmart or Compusa just think "oh neat" and buy a camera thinking it can replace their traditional 35mm, and then realize there is a downside. Obvious you and I know better, but someone buying their first digital camera probably doesn't.
Minor correction it should say,
"Unless your a serious photographer a 2.1MP with a good optical zoom..."
The reason is an optical zoom truely magnifies the subject, while a digital zoom just blows up the same area and doesn't really optically magnify it. This can often result in a blurry picture. So in otherwords, don't user digital zoom.
for anyone in the market for a digital camera. Unless you a serious photographer a 2.1MP with a good zoomable optical lens will work fine for most people. Having 3MP can't hurt, but anything beyond that is overkill(financially) for most people.
Ask yourself this. How many 8x10 photos have you made and kept in the past few years? If your like the average consumer and do 4x6's and 5x8 's a good 2.1MP will do you well.
Plus keep in mind that A) you will need a high speed connection if you want to upload your photos to an online printer. My father realized that after buying a 3MP and trying to upload a roll of 30 via a 56k line which as we all know only does 33.6 up. Also realize that B) printing your own photos is very expensive and between the ink and paper really burn money.
So while its all good and well that these higher MP camera are coming out, the cost of the camera can really sometime be minimal over the other expenses you may incur.