If you are running a server, are familiar with Red Hat, and don't want to spend the money on a RHEL license, then install CentOS. It is a rebuild of the RHEL source RPMs. Very stable, very nice. I use it on my personal servers and FC on my desktop. FC is in far too much flux to ever be a stable server platform (in my opinion). http://www.centos.org/
getting most of the development effort in useless eye-candy and only minimum development in important features for desktop users like easy hardware detection for a wide variety of hardware, Brainless software installation, excellent wireless support
I don't know what Linux distributions you've been using recently but I have recently installed Fedora Core 5 on my laptop and my experience was the opposite: that they must have been primarily focused on important features for desktop users. FC5 supported suspend and resuming my laptop, where FC4 didn't. FC5 supported my Centrino wireless with autodetection and configuration for both open access and WEP and WPA PSK protected networks right from the GNOME Desktop. FC5 automatically detected my USB-attached smart UPS on my desktop at work and can report the remaining run-time. It was the least-hassle desktop Linux install I've done yet.
As far as software installation, I don't use it but you can go to Applications->Add/Remove software and graphically browse thousands of software packages that are a click and a download away from being installed.
My FC4 version of mplayer didn't play them either. But Totem (which I believe was included in FC2) using the gstreamer backend had no problems playing them. The RPM you are looking for is 'totem' and I believe the codec for video Ogg files is in 'gstreamer-plugins'.
I know that this will probably be a completely foreign idea for anyone in education or government, but why not give the money back?
If you have to ask on Slashdot on how you should spend the money then I can only imagine one of two situations. Either your technology infrastructure has everything you need out of it, or you/your staff are unable to see what it needs and you should find jobs you are more suited to.
If it is the former, then why not refund the money back to the students who paid it? As a current taxpayer and recent student I am sick and tired of the waste of my money that occurs in the system by people spending money whimsically on unneeded expenditures. I'm sure those of your students that are working hard to pay their way through school would agree with me.
I can only speak from a U.S.A. perspective, but schools and government both seem to suffer under the idea that they ought to spend our money not because they need it, but because they can. The thought that you need to look for blue sky projects to spend the money on just because you have it sickens me.
That is no different then looking under the hood of a car you have purchased, finding out that it really has two hamsters running around in it for an engine, and publishing that finding in a magazine like consumer reports.
Would YOU want to mistakenly buy a car that was run by two hamsters because no one told you because they weren't even allowed to open the hood of their own car?
I know this may sound absurd, but so is your argument:). If a corporation writes shitty or misleading software we have a right to know about it.
Okay, I hate to reply to myself, but I just found another reason:
I'm on BUGTRAQ. I have been for quite a few years. Often a security problem is found and a commercial vendor remains unresponsive until someone produces a working exploit. Then, once the world has access to the exploit, the vendor usually begins work on a patch. Sometimes it's the only way to get their attention.
Now, the exploit itself has no legal purpose when you use it. It could be an educational tool to explain about buffer overruns/race conditions/whatever, perhaps. But often someone needs to write it and publish it or the vendor will never do anything about it.
Having virii and exploits should make us all more conscious of security and more prone to check your provider of software, check digital signatures, and more apt to want to see the source code.
The world is not a nice place and people would attempt to break into machines anyway. If having virii and exploits out there increases the level of security in software and systems then I am all for it.
I'd rather they raise taxes then to sell my personal data without my permission. There is *no* excuse for invasion of my privacy by any body, governmental or private.
Slashdot Mirror
If you are running a server, are familiar with Red Hat, and don't want to spend the money on a RHEL license, then install CentOS. It is a rebuild of the RHEL source RPMs. Very stable, very nice. I use it on my personal servers and FC on my desktop. FC is in far too much flux to ever be a stable server platform (in my opinion). http://www.centos.org/
I don't know what Linux distributions you've been using recently but I have recently installed Fedora Core 5 on my laptop and my experience was the opposite: that they must have been primarily focused on important features for desktop users. FC5 supported suspend and resuming my laptop, where FC4 didn't. FC5 supported my Centrino wireless with autodetection and configuration for both open access and WEP and WPA PSK protected networks right from the GNOME Desktop. FC5 automatically detected my USB-attached smart UPS on my desktop at work and can report the remaining run-time. It was the least-hassle desktop Linux install I've done yet.
As far as software installation, I don't use it but you can go to Applications->Add/Remove software and graphically browse thousands of software packages that are a click and a download away from being installed.
My FC4 version of mplayer didn't play them either. But Totem (which I believe was included in FC2) using the gstreamer backend had no problems playing them. The RPM you are looking for is 'totem' and I believe the codec for video Ogg files is in 'gstreamer-plugins'.
I know that this will probably be a completely foreign idea for anyone in education or government, but why not give the money back?
If you have to ask on Slashdot on how you should spend the money then I can only imagine one of two situations. Either your technology infrastructure has everything you need out of it, or you/your staff are unable to see what it needs and you should find jobs you are more suited to.
If it is the former, then why not refund the money back to the students who paid it? As a current taxpayer and recent student I am sick and tired of the waste of my money that occurs in the system by people spending money whimsically on unneeded expenditures. I'm sure those of your students that are working hard to pay their way through school would agree with me.
I can only speak from a U.S.A. perspective, but schools and government both seem to suffer under the idea that they ought to spend our money not because they need it, but because they can. The thought that you need to look for blue sky projects to spend the money on just because you have it sickens me.
That is no different then looking under the hood of a car you have purchased, finding out that it really has two hamsters running around in it for an engine, and publishing that finding in a magazine like consumer reports.
:). If a corporation writes shitty or misleading software we have a right to know about it.
Would YOU want to mistakenly buy a car that was run by two hamsters because no one told you because they weren't even allowed to open the hood of their own car?
I know this may sound absurd, but so is your argument
Okay, I hate to reply to myself, but I just found another reason:
I'm on BUGTRAQ. I have been for quite a few years. Often a security problem is found and a commercial vendor remains unresponsive until someone produces a working exploit. Then, once the world has access to the exploit, the vendor usually begins work on a patch. Sometimes it's the only way to get their attention.
Now, the exploit itself has no legal purpose when you use it. It could be an educational tool to explain about buffer overruns/race conditions/whatever, perhaps. But often someone needs to write it and publish it or the vendor will never do anything about it.
Having virii and exploits should make us all more conscious of security and more prone to check your provider of software, check digital signatures, and more apt to want to see the source code.
The world is not a nice place and people would attempt to break into machines anyway. If having virii and exploits out there increases the level of security in software and systems then I am all for it.
While a virus might have no legal use, what about studying it to learn about it? A virus is usually a fairly nice piece of code.
When it comes down to it, it's just a series of 1s and 0s, like and other software. It's up to the user to use it responsibly.
I'd rather they raise taxes then to sell my personal data without my permission. There is *no* excuse for invasion of my privacy by any body, governmental or private.