> As petty as it sounds, I don't like them because
> they are not dimmable. I have X10 all over and
> if I cannot dim the lights, then I don't want
> them.
One workaround would be to put lamps with different outputs in various places. If you need it bright, you turn on the 20W/20W/20W lights on the ceiling and if you want it darker, turn those off and use the 5W corner lamp instead. I had a standup lamp with three separate fixtures in it and I put a 20W, a 15W and a 5W compact fluourescent in there and turned them on according to my current needs/wants. Worked out very well.
> Plus, even if they fit standard Edison sockets,
> they are still larger and don't fit in enclosed
> fixtures.
That's true...a lot of old enclosed fixtures and even shade lamps still on sale today have not accomodated for these new lightbulbs. However, in my experience, it's absolutely worth the extra effort to change the fixture to something new. These lights pay themselves within three months compared to a equal light-output incadescent bulb. So even if you need to pick up a new fixture for 20 bucks, you'll still be saving massive amounts. In our house, once we changed over to compact fluourescents, we chopped our energy bill almost into half. Once you see that, you'll regret every day you haven't used them.
Generally we're using the Lights of America "Twister" bulbs. They're bright, don't flicker or hum annoyingly, the light is warm and yellow (you can't tell the difference between those and incadescents if you don't see the bulb itself) and sell here for about $8 a piece.
Current prices, taxes and all included, would have you pay close to $6 for a regular 60W incandescent light, if you had it on 24/7 for a month. To get the same light with a CF light bulb, you'd be using a 15W version, thus costing you only around $1.25 per month for the exact same light output.As has been pointed out already by other posters, they also last far longer (ca. 10.000 hours vs. 1000-2000 hours incandescent). We got started getting them a couple years ago and so far not one has broken. As a nice side-effect, we also experience far less switch blow-out's because of the reduced load on the (somewhat old) wiring system in the house.
> Being a relative newbie to Linux does 2.4.x have
> support for the ATA 100 Promise controller you
> spoke of? I switched my hard drive off of that
> because I couldn't use it in Linux at the time.
> Does the 2.4 kernel support it?
Yes, the Promise Ultra ATA100 is supported, as are the 66 and 33 versions. There's also a new card out...the Ultra ATA100/TX2, which will work with 66 MHz bus speeds (also backwards compatible with 33 MHz).
However, at this point Promise does not have a Linux driver available for this card and it's also not yet supported in the kernel. An attempt to install Linux to a hard drive on the TX2 controller will fail with a "no medium found to install to" error. Promise.com's support has told me, that a driver is in the works, but would probably not appear until "a month or month 1/2 from now" (said on 28th of June 2001).
Their web site's data sheet however lists Linux as supported OS, which seems very misleading at this point in time. As answer to my question, why it's listed as supported but shipped without such support I was told, that "they probably wanted to get the product out quick". So for now, do not get the TX2 card! Stick with the Ultra 100 and things should be OK.
> Before everyone comes down on me, I do think
> Slackware has one very important role.
Every distribution has an important role just by existing. Different minds will find different ways to accomplish something and that's precisely the power of the GNU/Linux/xBSD/OpenSource-"movement". It provides the chance for mindshare cross-pollination between the projects and distributions, accelerating overall development. May the best solutions prevail and come about through diversity, thus giving the equally diverse users various means to fulfil their individual needs and wants based on their free conscious choice over their computing environment. The names do not matter...the principle does.
IBM has pledged to spend 1 billion dollars on Linux this year alone. It's now half-time through the year and I would like to know, approximately how much has already been spend, where, and on what specific projects?
Further, has/will some of that amount go to TV-advertising? Especially, would IBM be willing to spend the cash for a Linux-Superbowl ad?
> But the all-out champion in the category was
> "Thief: The Dark Project." I don't think that
> there has been a game since (with the exception
> of Thief 2)that has come close to creating such
> an intense sense of environment (especially when
> played with EAX audio).
I agree with that. It was probably the first game, that really treated sound as essential part of the overall game-play, as opposed to a mere background filler. Incidentally, it came with my Soundblaster Live Platinum...a good choice for a bundle. Of course, the fact that Looking Glass folded after creating such an awesome game was shocking, to say the least. Eidos performed some CPR and is now selling the games (Thief III is in the works).
Unfortunately though, it's not available for Linux (yet). If you're interested, I strongly suggest calling their support number specifically requesting a port to Linux. As an alternative, vote for it on the Tuxgames.com petition site.
> Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen today
> released details of President Clinton's Fiscal
> Year (FY) 2001 defense budget. The budget
> requests $291.1 billion in budget authority and
> $277.5 billion in outlays for the Department of
> Defense (DoD).
> No.. the only reason they have lasted so long is
> due to DR DOS, and the Microsoft Lawsuit that
> payed them (and Canopy Group, their primary
> investor) a ton of cash.
That could well be true. If someone could comment on the actual amount, that "settled" this matter between them and Microsoft, I'd appreciate it.
What I most certainly didn't appreciate was the fact, that as soon as the settlement became a done deal, Caldera/Lineo stopped development of DR-DOS (last version was 7.03) completely. While I supported their lawsuit, which IMHO had far more merit than anything the Department of Justice went after, I couldn't help the feeling, that the settlement money was the only reason Caldera ever bought DR-DOS and the rights to it in the first place. OK, they did try to put it into embedded devices...rumors have it, that those funky UPS pads they give you to sign for a package runs on DR-DOS, but eventually focused primarely on Embedded Linux instead. While that makes sense, it sure would be nice, if DR-DOS at least would be open-sourced and GPL'd, now that it's all but forgotten by them (it doesn't even show up anymore on the Lineo products page) and they more than amortized their initial investment towards it.
Aside from this, I feel that Caldera is ultimately doomed anyway, because I do not know even one person, who has it installed as a desktop/home system. That will by definition reflect on it's acceptance in the corporate world, whether servers or desktops, because (IT) people tend to recommend/install that, what they know best (run at home).
But then, you have to wonder why something like the following would happen: At the 2001 Linux Expo in NY, Caldera had a stand and some young guy was leading the presentation. I went up to him later on and asked, whether I could perhaps have a copy of eServer to check out, which he gave to me without thinking twice. Nice move, as I had come to expect from the usually very cool people they have representing them. But my lady was just getting into Linux and wanted to check out the various distributions before deciding on a specific one. So she asked the same guy for a copy of eDesktop (which they had masses of in the booth, meant to be given away...in fact, he gave one out just before she asked). He looked at her weird (woman?!) and declined in a rather disrespectful way. Later one she asked him again, trying to get the point across that she's really interested and doesn't just want it because it may be free, but to actually install and use it at home. Again, he wouldn't give it to her (meanwhile we observed him giving out copies of the same thing to males who'd stop by). I felt, that was pretty messed up. Granted, they don't have to give you anything, but it just would have been a cool thing to do, especially since she expressed a sincere interest, he gave it to other people with no problems and it was the last day, where the stands usually clear out their swag-inventory anyway so they don't have to lug it back home.
As irony of fate would have it though, there was this swag-drawing later on and she actually *won* a copy of the very desktop, she's asked for in vain. It was rather gratifying, that Mr. Dork had to give it to her now:-)
Of course, by then it had become a tainted affair and she doesn't wanna use it anymore in favor of a different distro, who's people treated her with far more respect.
Another desktop, that won't have Caldera running.
(I do have to say though, that this guy stood out among the other Caldera guys. All, except him, were extremely friendly and helpful.)
> lets use it as a rally cry to begin a new wave
> of Linux development. Danmit! Lets Get Linux On
> The Desktop. Lets make a "SUPER SIMPLE" version
> of linux that my mother can use. Lets get off of
> our high horses and give this to the world who
> is crying for it. (whether they know it or not)
I wholeheartedly agree. While the installation procedures get dramatically better with each release of the various distro's, for the most part they're still not taking into account the everyday scenarios of common computer usage.
For example, most families will share one or two computers at home between several users. Current install procedures mostly do not reflect this in any way. Right there during setup should be a "Family" option, where you can create several accounts and set the various permissions ("Can Jimmy go online?" "Can Martha use the CD-ROM and speakers?" "Set up account and desktop for 6-year old Amanda exclusively as a game and learning station?"), so that by the time you're done everything is already set up for the most part.
I don't believe, btw., that it needs to be a 4-times-click NEXT procedure without any significant user input. People are generally willing to learn and figure things out. That will only work though, if things are presented in a human-understandable format, where the user feels empowered by the choices offered, not overpowered by alien geek-speak.
For example, "choose a mount-point" during partitioning is not understandable for most people...at least not in terms of computers:-) "Choose a directory, where the floppy/CD-ROM/etc. contents will be displayed when accessed" will probably be more helpful.
Good documentation is vital. Great strides have been made in this area and things are getting there. Most man pages, however, tend to be utterly useless until you get into the syntax and even then some are still incomprehensible. A simple EXAMPLES section would do wonders. Let's face it, documentation, that needs documentation to be understood defeats the purpose.
In terms of the desktop, Linux is almost there. Most home-users tend to do these main-things:
1. get online
2. browse the WWW
3. send/receive e-mail
4. instant messaging (incl. "chatting")
5. play games
6. play music CD's and perhaps DVD's
7. WordProcessing
8. Printing
While there are many more uses not mentioned, these seem to be the most prevalent from my observation.
All of that needs to be addressed during installation, if possible, for *every* account. It can't be, that sound works in one account (root?) but not in another. That will be a very frustrating experience for even a willing and smart newcomer to Linux. Therefore it should be dealt with right from the start so everything works close to what you want it to be when the installation is done.
Microsoft, out of all vendors, did a very smart thing by video-taping users trying to setup and use a Windows-station and then analyzing the road-blocks and difficulties experienced. Perhaps Linux-vendors would be well-advised to try something similar and incorporating the lessons learned into the OS and it's setup/administration utilities.
Overall, it's getting there though and dramatic progress is being made in Linux-land. Even at this point I already consider it a viable and mostly usable computing environment on both server and desktop even for newcomers. But like everything else, there's always room for improvement and if user/usage issues are taken seriously, then without doubt many people will choose Linux on it's own merits.
Harka
--
Software, that's too difficult to use and administer by a willing person is, by design and definition, buggy!
Most people will say similar things "Oh, I have nothing important" and yet, deep down there *is* an expectation of privacy. Why? Because you do not see the people reading your e-mail! Out of sight, out of mind type syndrome. But put another person in front of their computer and tell them to check out their In/Outboxes from top to bottom and you'll most definitely see the owner jumping right in "What the hell are you doing reading my mail?!!"
That's the problem...a perceived sense of security and privacy that seems to resist all rationale.
It's the same with other spooky figures...yes, everyone knows, there are bad guys and burglars out there, but most people will continue to assume, that it hit's only *others* (the Susie B.'s from the newspaper), not them.
I propose checkmail.org, where a few thousand random mail messages are captured and put up for general amusement. Then people will get pissed, because, after all, e-mail is private!:-)
Actually the new mame seems to be Linux=Virus, which is probably very effective given the current concern over viruses. Not-so-technical people (i.e. the one's who open Fw:Fw:Fw:attachment.jpg.vbs) will sooner or later fall for this and associate Linux with danger. In fact, now that this theme has been given some time to sink into people's (sub)consciousness, I fully expect an actual "Linux" virus (for Windows) to appear shortly, which will complete the meme.
As to the overall situation, it needs to be said, that Linux and therefore it's users should not be anti-anything, but pro-GoodThing. People are drawn to Linux not because MS as a company is necessarely an issue for them in any way, but by the positive image, that Linux provides in terms of *world-wide cooperation* *freedom to share and contribute* and *empowering the users by giving them choices* do do, whatever it may be in the best fashion.
Microsoft is a non-issue, because any true GNU/Open-Source-supporter will adamently defend the users right to choose their computing environment, whether that be a Microsoft OS, Linux, xBSD, MacOS, Plan 9 or anything else. It's the users decision and nobody should interfere with that or assume the "right" to know what's better for them. That includes OEM's...as long as a certain OS is mandatorily pre-installed no such freedom exists. The default should be a blank computer with various Operating System choices, that the user can make at time of purchase. *That* should be advocated, a pro-freedom stand!
Once that happens, rhetoric such as Mr. Ballmer's or conversely GNU/rabids will be relegated back to what it has always been: useless and divisive speech, that does nothing to further humanity's search for better computing environments, which can serve us as a whole in the best way.
It's because up to this point it was a royal pain to get the 3D direct rendering to work!
I got this game for myself as a Xmas present and was trying quite diligently for several weekends to get the Xfree 3.3.6-based stuff going (Mesa, DRI, Matrox driver etc.), all the while my lady looked at me in pity for all the effort I went through "just to play a game". I never got it working right (got to see the screen but got 1 frame per hour) with 3.3.6. Now I got Xfree 4.0.3 and finally everything works two months later (can play it at 1024x756 with everything funky enabled on a PII-300 with a Matrox G400Max).
Until the distributions enable DRI out of the box ("A Direct Rendering capable card was detected. Would you like to enable DRI?") during the installation, the vast majority of potential game-players is just not gonna go for it. After all, the whole point of "playing" is to have fun. It's not fun to read hundreds of pages, tweak this, download that and things still aren't working right. It needs to be as easy as popping in the CD, do "setup.sh" and start playing away.
Having said that though, I believe, that Linux is just at the point, where that will become a reality. Suse/Redhat 7.1, Mandrake 8.0 etc.. all come with X 4.0.2/4.0.3 and hopefully have or will include DRI out of the box asap. When that happens, there's no doubt in my mind that people will buy games, because then it's fun and not a hassle. Most folks I talk to aren't nearly as impressed about web servers, networking, cool-kernels etc.. as they are, when I show them some screenshots from, let's say, Loki's site. "Wow...so that runs on Linux?" "Maybe I should check it out..."
Q3A/tin was well-worth (now that it works beautifully) the 40 bucks I paid for it. And it's definitely not the last game I bought.
I won't buy Windows games, unless it's absolutely unavoidable...i.e. the game doesn't exist at all for Linux, in which case I call the company's support number and ask for a port. I did this for "Thief" with EidosInteractive and while he said, that currently he's not aware of plans for a Linux-port, he did promise me to add me "to the ever-growing list of people who request a Linux-port" (direct quote).
There's much you can do to improve the situation, even if it's "just" sending an e-mail or calling an 1800 number!
Just as with the kernel, I really don't mind waiting right now for the distro's to wrap up. Xfree 4.0.3 (incl. out-of-the-box DRI), 2.4.3 kernel, KDE 2.1 and Gnome 1.4 are definitely worth the wait. I rather they all get it right, especially since these distro's will likely be the one's competing against XP, when it comes out.
Slashdot Mirror
> As petty as it sounds, I don't like them because
> they are not dimmable. I have X10 all over and
> if I cannot dim the lights, then I don't want
> them.
One workaround would be to put lamps with different outputs in various places. If you need it bright, you turn on the 20W/20W/20W lights on the ceiling and if you want it darker, turn those off and use the 5W corner lamp instead. I had a standup lamp with three separate fixtures in it and I put a 20W, a 15W and a 5W compact fluourescent in there and turned them on according to my current needs/wants. Worked out very well.
> Plus, even if they fit standard Edison sockets,
> they are still larger and don't fit in enclosed
> fixtures.
That's true...a lot of old enclosed fixtures and even shade lamps still on sale today have not accomodated for these new lightbulbs. However, in my experience, it's absolutely worth the extra effort to change the fixture to something new. These lights pay themselves within three months compared to a equal light-output incadescent bulb. So even if you need to pick up a new fixture for 20 bucks, you'll still be saving massive amounts. In our house, once we changed over to compact fluourescents, we chopped our energy bill almost into half. Once you see that, you'll regret every day you haven't used them.
Generally we're using the Lights of America "Twister" bulbs. They're bright, don't flicker or hum annoyingly, the light is warm and yellow (you can't tell the difference between those and incadescents if you don't see the bulb itself) and sell here for about $8 a piece.
Current prices, taxes and all included, would have you pay close to $6 for a regular 60W incandescent light, if you had it on 24/7 for a month. To get the same light with a CF light bulb, you'd be using a 15W version, thus costing you only around $1.25 per month for the exact same light output.As has been pointed out already by other posters, they also last far longer (ca. 10.000 hours vs. 1000-2000 hours incandescent). We got started getting them a couple years ago and so far not one has broken. As a nice side-effect, we also experience far less switch blow-out's because of the reduced load on the (somewhat old) wiring system in the house.
> Being a relative newbie to Linux does 2.4.x have
> support for the ATA 100 Promise controller you
> spoke of? I switched my hard drive off of that
> because I couldn't use it in Linux at the time.
> Does the 2.4 kernel support it?
Yes, the Promise Ultra ATA100 is supported, as are the 66 and 33 versions. There's also a new card out...the Ultra ATA100/TX2, which will work with 66 MHz bus speeds (also backwards compatible with 33 MHz).
However, at this point Promise does not have a Linux driver available for this card and it's also not yet supported in the kernel. An attempt to install Linux to a hard drive on the TX2 controller will fail with a "no medium found to install to" error. Promise.com's support has told me, that a driver is in the works, but would probably not appear until "a month or month 1/2 from now" (said on 28th of June 2001).
Their web site's data sheet however lists Linux as supported OS, which seems very misleading at this point in time. As answer to my question, why it's listed as supported but shipped without such support I was told, that "they probably wanted to get the product out quick". So for now, do not get the TX2 card! Stick with the Ultra 100 and things should be OK.
Harka
> Before everyone comes down on me, I do think
> Slackware has one very important role.
Every distribution has an important role just by existing. Different minds will find different ways to accomplish something and that's precisely the power of the GNU/Linux/xBSD/OpenSource-"movement". It provides the chance for mindshare cross-pollination between the projects and distributions, accelerating overall development. May the best solutions prevail and come about through diversity, thus giving the equally diverse users various means to fulfil their individual needs and wants based on their free conscious choice over their computing environment. The names do not matter...the principle does.
Harka
IBM has pledged to spend 1 billion dollars on Linux this year alone. It's now half-time through the year and I would like to know, approximately how much has already been spend, where, and on what specific projects?
Further, has/will some of that amount go to TV-advertising? Especially, would IBM be willing to spend the cash for a Linux-Superbowl ad?
Thanks!
> But the all-out champion in the category was
> "Thief: The Dark Project." I don't think that
> there has been a game since (with the exception
> of Thief 2)that has come close to creating such
> an intense sense of environment (especially when
> played with EAX audio).
I agree with that. It was probably the first game, that really treated sound as essential part of the overall game-play, as opposed to a mere background filler. Incidentally, it came with my Soundblaster Live Platinum...a good choice for a bundle. Of course, the fact that Looking Glass folded after creating such an awesome game was shocking, to say the least. Eidos performed some CPR and is now selling the games (Thief III is in the works).
Unfortunately though, it's not available for Linux (yet). If you're interested, I strongly suggest calling their support number specifically requesting a port to Linux. As an alternative, vote for it on the Tuxgames.com petition site.
> The DoD already has a measly budget
0 0_ bt045-00.html
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Feb2000/b020720
> Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen today
> released details of President Clinton's Fiscal
> Year (FY) 2001 defense budget. The budget
> requests $291.1 billion in budget authority and
> $277.5 billion in outlays for the Department of
> Defense (DoD).
Measly...lousy even.
> No.. the only reason they have lasted so long is
:-)
> due to DR DOS, and the Microsoft Lawsuit that
> payed them (and Canopy Group, their primary
> investor) a ton of cash.
That could well be true. If someone could comment on the actual amount, that "settled" this matter between them and Microsoft, I'd appreciate it.
What I most certainly didn't appreciate was the fact, that as soon as the settlement became a done deal, Caldera/Lineo stopped development of DR-DOS (last version was 7.03) completely. While I supported their lawsuit, which IMHO had far more merit than anything the Department of Justice went after, I couldn't help the feeling, that the settlement money was the only reason Caldera ever bought DR-DOS and the rights to it in the first place. OK, they did try to put it into embedded devices...rumors have it, that those funky UPS pads they give you to sign for a package runs on DR-DOS, but eventually focused primarely on Embedded Linux instead. While that makes sense, it sure would be nice, if DR-DOS at least would be open-sourced and GPL'd, now that it's all but forgotten by them (it doesn't even show up anymore on the Lineo products page) and they more than amortized their initial investment towards it.
Aside from this, I feel that Caldera is ultimately doomed anyway, because I do not know even one person, who has it installed as a desktop/home system. That will by definition reflect on it's acceptance in the corporate world, whether servers or desktops, because (IT) people tend to recommend/install that, what they know best (run at home).
But then, you have to wonder why something like the following would happen: At the 2001 Linux Expo in NY, Caldera had a stand and some young guy was leading the presentation. I went up to him later on and asked, whether I could perhaps have a copy of eServer to check out, which he gave to me without thinking twice. Nice move, as I had come to expect from the usually very cool people they have representing them. But my lady was just getting into Linux and wanted to check out the various distributions before deciding on a specific one. So she asked the same guy for a copy of eDesktop (which they had masses of in the booth, meant to be given away...in fact, he gave one out just before she asked). He looked at her weird (woman?!) and declined in a rather disrespectful way. Later one she asked him again, trying to get the point across that she's really interested and doesn't just want it because it may be free, but to actually install and use it at home. Again, he wouldn't give it to her (meanwhile we observed him giving out copies of the same thing to males who'd stop by). I felt, that was pretty messed up. Granted, they don't have to give you anything, but it just would have been a cool thing to do, especially since she expressed a sincere interest, he gave it to other people with no problems and it was the last day, where the stands usually clear out their swag-inventory anyway so they don't have to lug it back home.
As irony of fate would have it though, there was this swag-drawing later on and she actually *won* a copy of the very desktop, she's asked for in vain. It was rather gratifying, that Mr. Dork had to give it to her now
Of course, by then it had become a tainted affair and she doesn't wanna use it anymore in favor of a different distro, who's people treated her with far more respect.
Another desktop, that won't have Caldera running.
(I do have to say though, that this guy stood out among the other Caldera guys. All, except him, were extremely friendly and helpful.)
At least we can now proudly proclaim, that we use PacMan as our OS (chomp, chomp). It could be MineSweeper, you know...(BOOM!!) :-)
> lets use it as a rally cry to begin a new wave
:-) "Choose a directory, where the floppy/CD-ROM/etc. contents will be displayed when accessed" will probably be more helpful.
> of Linux development. Danmit! Lets Get Linux On
> The Desktop. Lets make a "SUPER SIMPLE" version
> of linux that my mother can use. Lets get off of
> our high horses and give this to the world who
> is crying for it. (whether they know it or not)
I wholeheartedly agree. While the installation procedures get dramatically better with each release of the various distro's, for the most part they're still not taking into account the everyday scenarios of common computer usage.
For example, most families will share one or two computers at home between several users. Current install procedures mostly do not reflect this in any way. Right there during setup should be a "Family" option, where you can create several accounts and set the various permissions ("Can Jimmy go online?" "Can Martha use the CD-ROM and speakers?" "Set up account and desktop for 6-year old Amanda exclusively as a game and learning station?"), so that by the time you're done everything is already set up for the most part.
I don't believe, btw., that it needs to be a 4-times-click NEXT procedure without any significant user input. People are generally willing to learn and figure things out. That will only work though, if things are presented in a human-understandable format, where the user feels empowered by the choices offered, not overpowered by alien geek-speak.
For example, "choose a mount-point" during partitioning is not understandable for most people...at least not in terms of computers
Good documentation is vital. Great strides have been made in this area and things are getting there. Most man pages, however, tend to be utterly useless until you get into the syntax and even then some are still incomprehensible. A simple EXAMPLES section would do wonders. Let's face it, documentation, that needs documentation to be understood defeats the purpose.
In terms of the desktop, Linux is almost there. Most home-users tend to do these main-things:
1. get online
2. browse the WWW
3. send/receive e-mail
4. instant messaging (incl. "chatting")
5. play games
6. play music CD's and perhaps DVD's
7. WordProcessing
8. Printing
While there are many more uses not mentioned, these seem to be the most prevalent from my observation.
All of that needs to be addressed during installation, if possible, for *every* account. It can't be, that sound works in one account (root?) but not in another. That will be a very frustrating experience for even a willing and smart newcomer to Linux. Therefore it should be dealt with right from the start so everything works close to what you want it to be when the installation is done.
Microsoft, out of all vendors, did a very smart thing by video-taping users trying to setup and use a Windows-station and then analyzing the road-blocks and difficulties experienced. Perhaps Linux-vendors would be well-advised to try something similar and incorporating the lessons learned into the OS and it's setup/administration utilities.
Overall, it's getting there though and dramatic progress is being made in Linux-land. Even at this point I already consider it a viable and mostly usable computing environment on both server and desktop even for newcomers. But like everything else, there's always room for improvement and if user/usage issues are taken seriously, then without doubt many people will choose Linux on it's own merits.
Harka
--
Software, that's too difficult to use and administer by a willing person is, by design and definition, buggy!
Most people will say similar things "Oh, I have nothing important" and yet, deep down there *is* an expectation of privacy. Why? Because you do not see the people reading your e-mail! Out of sight, out of mind type syndrome. But put another person in front of their computer and tell them to check out their In/Outboxes from top to bottom and you'll most definitely see the owner jumping right in "What the hell are you doing reading my mail?!!"
:-)
That's the problem...a perceived sense of security and privacy that seems to resist all rationale.
It's the same with other spooky figures...yes, everyone knows, there are bad guys and burglars out there, but most people will continue to assume, that it hit's only *others* (the Susie B.'s from the newspaper), not them.
I propose checkmail.org, where a few thousand random mail messages are captured and put up for general amusement. Then people will get pissed, because, after all, e-mail is private!
Actually the new mame seems to be Linux=Virus, which is probably very effective given the current concern over viruses. Not-so-technical people (i.e. the one's who open Fw:Fw:Fw:attachment.jpg.vbs) will sooner or later fall for this and associate Linux with danger. In fact, now that this theme has been given some time to sink into people's (sub)consciousness, I fully expect an actual "Linux" virus (for Windows) to appear shortly, which will complete the meme.
As to the overall situation, it needs to be said, that Linux and therefore it's users should not be anti-anything, but pro-GoodThing. People are drawn to Linux not because MS as a company is necessarely an issue for them in any way, but by the positive image, that Linux provides in terms of *world-wide cooperation* *freedom to share and contribute* and *empowering the users by giving them choices* do do, whatever it may be in the best fashion.
Microsoft is a non-issue, because any true GNU/Open-Source-supporter will adamently defend the users right to choose their computing environment, whether that be a Microsoft OS, Linux, xBSD, MacOS, Plan 9 or anything else. It's the users decision and nobody should interfere with that or assume the "right" to know what's better for them. That includes OEM's...as long as a certain OS is mandatorily pre-installed no such freedom exists. The default should be a blank computer with various Operating System choices, that the user can make at time of purchase. *That* should be advocated, a pro-freedom stand!
Once that happens, rhetoric such as Mr. Ballmer's or conversely GNU/rabids will be relegated back to what it has always been: useless and divisive speech, that does nothing to further humanity's search for better computing environments, which can serve us as a whole in the best way.
http://www.laborsoft.com/
Cool! Thanks for the Info! Does anybody know, whether Mandrake 8.0 also has DRI out-of-the-box?
It's because up to this point it was a royal pain to get the 3D direct rendering to work!
I got this game for myself as a Xmas present and was trying quite diligently for several weekends to get the Xfree 3.3.6-based stuff going (Mesa, DRI, Matrox driver etc.), all the while my lady looked at me in pity for all the effort I went through "just to play a game". I never got it working right (got to see the screen but got 1 frame per hour) with 3.3.6. Now I got Xfree 4.0.3 and finally everything works two months later (can play it at 1024x756 with everything funky enabled on a PII-300 with a Matrox G400Max).
Until the distributions enable DRI out of the box ("A Direct Rendering capable card was detected. Would you like to enable DRI?") during the installation, the vast majority of potential game-players is just not gonna go for it. After all, the whole point of "playing" is to have fun. It's not fun to read hundreds of pages, tweak this, download that and things still aren't working right. It needs to be as easy as popping in the CD, do "setup.sh" and start playing away.
Having said that though, I believe, that Linux is just at the point, where that will become a reality. Suse/Redhat 7.1, Mandrake 8.0 etc.. all come with X 4.0.2/4.0.3 and hopefully have or will include DRI out of the box asap. When that happens, there's no doubt in my mind that people will buy games, because then it's fun and not a hassle. Most folks I talk to aren't nearly as impressed about web servers, networking, cool-kernels etc.. as they are, when I show them some screenshots from, let's say, Loki's site. "Wow...so that runs on Linux?" "Maybe I should check it out..."
Q3A/tin was well-worth (now that it works beautifully) the 40 bucks I paid for it. And it's definitely not the last game I bought.
I won't buy Windows games, unless it's absolutely unavoidable...i.e. the game doesn't exist at all for Linux, in which case I call the company's support number and ask for a port. I did this for "Thief" with EidosInteractive and while he said, that currently he's not aware of plans for a Linux-port, he did promise me to add me "to the ever-growing list of people who request a Linux-port" (direct quote).
There's much you can do to improve the situation, even if it's "just" sending an e-mail or calling an 1800 number!
Just as with the kernel, I really don't mind waiting right now for the distro's to wrap up. Xfree 4.0.3 (incl. out-of-the-box DRI), 2.4.3 kernel, KDE 2.1 and Gnome 1.4 are definitely worth the wait. I rather they all get it right, especially since these distro's will likely be the one's competing against XP, when it comes out.