lemme step back for a sec and give an example, since repeating myself obviously won't work. You didn't get it the first time, you won't a second time.
The Ferrari Enzo is a great car. Fabulous car. 0-200 in less time than it takes me to sneeze (I always sneeze in 3s, so it gives the Enzo a bit extra time).
However, the claim of the thread-starter is that the Enzo is going to be the New Thing for moving companies. Yes, just strap the grand piano on top of the Enzo and...
Ubuntu has it's purpose, and it's good at it. What it isn't suited for is the large server environment. That doesn't mean it's worthless. I'm not suited for donating to a non-B-neg blood type person. Does that mean the Red Cross doesn't want my blood? No. It just doesn't want it for someone who is AB-pos.
Be what you are. Next you'll tell me you spend hours trying to make Ubuntu play World of Warcraft, instead of just letting Windows run it:P
btw - changing run levels is a quite common thing in corporate envs...install patch clusters, etc. Oops, gosh, why was I using Ubuntu again?
Give me one single quality that Ubuntu offers that a sysadmin would want or need. I can give you dozens that slow down their work.
Does that mean that Ubuntu is worthless? Heavens no! It does what it does very well, actually - it is just not in any way geared toward servers. It's geared toward people who can't even figure out how to stop a service in MS. It's linux without needing to know anything about linux. Which is *great*! It's just not for me, or server environments.
I dislike RedHat on some levels too (mostly the installer more than anything), but at least it's the devil I know...that, and
For personal use, I started off with Slackware (in 1994), moved to Debian, and now do either Gentoo or my own home-spun stuff. Never have I used RedHat for personal stuff, only at work (where I've also used Debian, Skyld, and a peculiar little number...)
Are you going to actually respond to what I said, or are you just going to make assumptions about me?
Granted, the same sort of people that are using Ubuntu now are the same sort of people who used Linux 10-15 years ago, BUT...Linux is no longer a hobby OS. If you want a hobby OS, try Hurd. If a couple RMS predictions come true soon enough, it would be the next Linux killer. Unfortunately (yes, unfortunately) they won't come true IMO.
What I don't understand is all the hobbyists, all the anti-ThaMan folks, who don't mind having their OS make EVERY freaking decision for them. If I want to start up at init2 and log in as root, back the hell off, I know what I'm doing.:P
Alternatively, has anyone ever actually used RedHat support? *I* wasn't impressed...
And I haven't been impressed by Ubuntu. Not their support - just the distro itself. I HATE the freaking hand-holding. It's worse than what Microsoft does.
I've never needed to use support from RedHat myself. I've run 4 different distros in corp environments, never needed support for any of them. If there's a problem, I can find it myself, and maybe I'll let them know if I have time. But Ubuntu?
I don't see sysadmins flocking to it. I see unemployed hippies that volunteer at their local libraries using it, but not one single professional linux sysadmin that I know uses Ubuntu. Tried it out, sure. Use it for any period of time? Hell no. If I want my hand held, I'll go install XP and let Clippie tell me what to do.
what about those of us who don't want to have to figure out what games use what to do what etc? I'm a UNIX admin. I play with big Suns. I have an old laptop that handles warcraft3 well enough - I'd like to try some of the "new" games like WoW or such...maybe even Vanguard. Would be nice if the industry could just agree on some standard (what was wrong with opengl?) and work at being the best for the *standard*, versus diverging in ways that just confuse the consumers. "texture-heavy?" "shader-intensive?" How is the general person out there supposed to know? I just want something that I won't have to replace in the next couple years.
I doubt there was a conspiracy. More likely, people drive with the phone on their left if they drive manual transmission, and they drive with the phone on their right or left fairly equally if they have automatic. Further, people have tended to shake with their right hand for a very long time, which is a hard habbit to break. The right hand has been left as the "free" hand for openning doors, etc. The left hand has tended to be the hand that carries things. So the right hand then became the cell phone hand for most non-driving people (NYers, for instance).
What would be necessary is a controlled enviroment with no cell phones for several decades, and then checking to see if the sort of people who have been using cell phones a lot and have brain tumors - what side those tended to be on (tumor-wise) back pre-cell phones. People that hold phones on the left side of their head tend to be those without a briefcase, those who drive manual transmission cars, blah. Those with it on the right tend to be male, drive automatic, carry things, etc. There's actual tendencies there that could be looked at.
And maybe they have been looked at, and as such any tendencies for the phone to be on the same side as the tumor can't necessarily be said to be because fo the cell phone, instead of just a behavioural issue of some sort. There really isn't enough evidence either way.
almost all the games I'm interested in still runs on my p3 850 laptop, with integrated graphics from 1999. Starcraft, Masters of Magic, Civ3, XCOM, etc.
Warcraft3 doesn't run that great on it, BUT - for that, I have a couple other laptops;)
Maybe I'd be more excited about all this if I played games for more than an hour total per week.
if you spend 3 hours a day playing games (2 too many) playing 3 different games 1 hour each, it would take you over a month to cycle through your games. That's dumb.
How about getting maybe 5 or 6 that you really like, and playing them? Then it doesn't matter a hill of beans. Also note that in theory, a PC can be used for other things (writing a resume', doing school work...) while you'd be hard-pressed to do such on an xbox.
There are simple reasons (that have been gone over and over here) why PCs as gaming platforms are still around. Nevermind the fact that you have to get a TV to go along with that game console, which is another big cost...
I've had a particular hotmail address for....a long time. Most likely in 97.
I was getting a LOT of spam for a while, turned on most everything that could be turned on, I flag it all as junk...but I still get 20ish a day. Really, I just skim it fast to see if I have anything from people I know, then I go back to gmail or such (where I only get 1 or 2 spam emails a day).
If 20ish a day is their version of stable, I'd prefer it stabilize a little bit...lower.
First of all, an expensive, fancy, flashy, movie-filled portal talking about the wonders of oil, how lovely tax breaks are, and etc...doesn't have really any more reason to have high traffic than a simple, text-only page walking about hugging trees. It's not like TV or radio where the advertizements are exceptionally disruptive. Black popups, ignore the banners (or block them too), and voila! Who the hell then cares how much they spend?
Secondly...the Dems were the ones that had the massive online campaign stuff - moveon.org ring any bells? The Republicans would have done well for moveon.org to have been restricted. This act would have eliminated those restrictions. Now, all those political blogs (which are more of a Dem thing) have to deal with all that junk. They shot themselves in the foot.
To sum: you're full of BS. The notion that the Dems are the party of "free speech" is absurd. Both parties could care less.
oh wait, that's because almost 3 and a half years ago slashdot reported about a car that ran off methanol, which was hydrolized in the car to fuel a 75Kw fuel cell. It was called the Necar5.
Not to belittle the Israeli work, point is that hydrolizing a source at-need and thus preventing the requirement of carrying around a big bomb (large tank of lyquid hydrogen) has been done already.
I am looking forward to hopefully being able to get a car run off fuel cells by...I dunno, 2010 or so. This just isn't a new breakthru in fuel cell usage that it's being sold as.
Slashdot Mirror
lemme step back for a sec and give an example, since repeating myself obviously won't work. You didn't get it the first time, you won't a second time.
:P
The Ferrari Enzo is a great car. Fabulous car. 0-200 in less time than it takes me to sneeze (I always sneeze in 3s, so it gives the Enzo a bit extra time).
However, the claim of the thread-starter is that the Enzo is going to be the New Thing for moving companies. Yes, just strap the grand piano on top of the Enzo and...
Ubuntu has it's purpose, and it's good at it. What it isn't suited for is the large server environment. That doesn't mean it's worthless. I'm not suited for donating to a non-B-neg blood type person. Does that mean the Red Cross doesn't want my blood? No. It just doesn't want it for someone who is AB-pos.
Be what you are. Next you'll tell me you spend hours trying to make Ubuntu play World of Warcraft, instead of just letting Windows run it
read my response to this that I already gave. Ubuntu is *great* for what it is. It is not, however, a server-ready distro.
btw - changing run levels is a quite common thing in corporate envs...install patch clusters, etc. Oops, gosh, why was I using Ubuntu again?
Give me one single quality that Ubuntu offers that a sysadmin would want or need. I can give you dozens that slow down their work.
Does that mean that Ubuntu is worthless? Heavens no! It does what it does very well, actually - it is just not in any way geared toward servers. It's geared toward people who can't even figure out how to stop a service in MS. It's linux without needing to know anything about linux. Which is *great*! It's just not for me, or server environments.
I'm not trolling, AC. I don't want the OS to stop me. Yes, I know how to change all the various hand-holdings to go away, but I don't want to have to.
What the hell does Ubuntu offer other than the hand-holding, anyway? If I remove it all, then I'm left with...what?
You want your hand held, for mommy to tell you when to wipe your nose. I don't.
I dislike RedHat on some levels too (mostly the installer more than anything), but at least it's the devil I know...that, and
:P
For personal use, I started off with Slackware (in 1994), moved to Debian, and now do either Gentoo or my own home-spun stuff. Never have I used RedHat for personal stuff, only at work (where I've also used Debian, Skyld, and a peculiar little number...)
Are you going to actually respond to what I said, or are you just going to make assumptions about me?
Granted, the same sort of people that are using Ubuntu now are the same sort of people who used Linux 10-15 years ago, BUT...Linux is no longer a hobby OS. If you want a hobby OS, try Hurd. If a couple RMS predictions come true soon enough, it would be the next Linux killer. Unfortunately (yes, unfortunately) they won't come true IMO.
What I don't understand is all the hobbyists, all the anti-ThaMan folks, who don't mind having their OS make EVERY freaking decision for them. If I want to start up at init2 and log in as root, back the hell off, I know what I'm doing.
Alternatively, has anyone ever actually used RedHat support? *I* wasn't impressed...
And I haven't been impressed by Ubuntu. Not their support - just the distro itself. I HATE the freaking hand-holding. It's worse than what Microsoft does.
I've never needed to use support from RedHat myself. I've run 4 different distros in corp environments, never needed support for any of them. If there's a problem, I can find it myself, and maybe I'll let them know if I have time. But Ubuntu?
I don't see sysadmins flocking to it. I see unemployed hippies that volunteer at their local libraries using it, but not one single professional linux sysadmin that I know uses Ubuntu. Tried it out, sure. Use it for any period of time? Hell no. If I want my hand held, I'll go install XP and let Clippie tell me what to do.
if there's something I've learned over the years, it's that logic will never win out in a convo on /. - best of luck to you, though ;)
what about those of us who don't want to have to figure out what games use what to do what etc? I'm a UNIX admin. I play with big Suns. I have an old laptop that handles warcraft3 well enough - I'd like to try some of the "new" games like WoW or such...maybe even Vanguard. Would be nice if the industry could just agree on some standard (what was wrong with opengl?) and work at being the best for the *standard*, versus diverging in ways that just confuse the consumers. "texture-heavy?" "shader-intensive?" How is the general person out there supposed to know? I just want something that I won't have to replace in the next couple years.
didn't even notice the bottom bit, dismissed it as a sig.
What about it infuriates you? The typo? You need to get out more...
point is merely that there's no possible control group, no way to tell which of the multitudes of enviromental factors cause the increased chances.
hold your cell phone with your shoulder. Now, try to shift gears.
tada! left side of your head.
I doubt there was a conspiracy. More likely, people drive with the phone on their left if they drive manual transmission, and they drive with the phone on their right or left fairly equally if they have automatic. Further, people have tended to shake with their right hand for a very long time, which is a hard habbit to break. The right hand has been left as the "free" hand for openning doors, etc. The left hand has tended to be the hand that carries things. So the right hand then became the cell phone hand for most non-driving people (NYers, for instance).
What would be necessary is a controlled enviroment with no cell phones for several decades, and then checking to see if the sort of people who have been using cell phones a lot and have brain tumors - what side those tended to be on (tumor-wise) back pre-cell phones. People that hold phones on the left side of their head tend to be those without a briefcase, those who drive manual transmission cars, blah. Those with it on the right tend to be male, drive automatic, carry things, etc. There's actual tendencies there that could be looked at.
And maybe they have been looked at, and as such any tendencies for the phone to be on the same side as the tumor can't necessarily be said to be because fo the cell phone, instead of just a behavioural issue of some sort. There really isn't enough evidence either way.
eh, laymen can look up white papers ;)
almost all the games I'm interested in still runs on my p3 850 laptop, with integrated graphics from 1999. Starcraft, Masters of Magic, Civ3, XCOM, etc.
;)
Warcraft3 doesn't run that great on it, BUT - for that, I have a couple other laptops
Maybe I'd be more excited about all this if I played games for more than an hour total per week.
if you spend 3 hours a day playing games (2 too many) playing 3 different games 1 hour each, it would take you over a month to cycle through your games. That's dumb.
How about getting maybe 5 or 6 that you really like, and playing them? Then it doesn't matter a hill of beans. Also note that in theory, a PC can be used for other things (writing a resume', doing school work...) while you'd be hard-pressed to do such on an xbox.
There are simple reasons (that have been gone over and over here) why PCs as gaming platforms are still around. Nevermind the fact that you have to get a TV to go along with that game console, which is another big cost...
sooo....you want to be a good nerd?
I've had a particular hotmail address for....a long time. Most likely in 97.
I was getting a LOT of spam for a while, turned on most everything that could be turned on, I flag it all as junk...but I still get 20ish a day. Really, I just skim it fast to see if I have anything from people I know, then I go back to gmail or such (where I only get 1 or 2 spam emails a day).
If 20ish a day is their version of stable, I'd prefer it stabilize a little bit...lower.
nah, I was http://slashdot.org/~dAzED too - but forgot the password for that account. ;)
it doesn't rot because of the sun. In fact, the sun slows the process down considerably. It would rot much faster if you covered it.
just sayin...
I was almost thinking that they were just being sarcastic...since, well, the facts weren't presented falsely.
freakin-A I have a lot of goobered letters in there. It can still be read, grammar and spelling-nazis. Leave it be. ;)
First of all, an expensive, fancy, flashy, movie-filled portal talking about the wonders of oil, how lovely tax breaks are, and etc...doesn't have really any more reason to have high traffic than a simple, text-only page walking about hugging trees. It's not like TV or radio where the advertizements are exceptionally disruptive. Black popups, ignore the banners (or block them too), and voila! Who the hell then cares how much they spend?
Secondly...the Dems were the ones that had the massive online campaign stuff - moveon.org ring any bells? The Republicans would have done well for moveon.org to have been restricted. This act would have eliminated those restrictions. Now, all those political blogs (which are more of a Dem thing) have to deal with all that junk. They shot themselves in the foot.
To sum: you're full of BS. The notion that the Dems are the party of "free speech" is absurd. Both parties could care less.
your point will be ignored. Which is unfortunate.
The fact that there have been fuel cell cars on the road for years will also be ignored. That is likewise unfortunate.
Fuel cells seem to be getting more viable as an alternative, and may soon start showing the promise we know exists.
Which is very, very, fortunate.
(the problem you mention will be solved...and isn't actually a terrible show-stopper really)
just as efficient? Not really. That, and steam is just a weeeee bit cleaner than burned methanol.
oh wait, that's because almost 3 and a half years ago slashdot reported about a car that ran off methanol, which was hydrolized in the car to fuel a 75Kw fuel cell. It was called the Necar5.
Not to belittle the Israeli work, point is that hydrolizing a source at-need and thus preventing the requirement of carrying around a big bomb (large tank of lyquid hydrogen) has been done already.
I am looking forward to hopefully being able to get a car run off fuel cells by...I dunno, 2010 or so. This just isn't a new breakthru in fuel cell usage that it's being sold as.