The same could easily be said about Blender's UI (at first). The UI is irrelevant. Eventually, you learn hwo to use it and adapt accordingly. I am not recommending trueSpace in anyway, but nonetheless, people do learn how to use even the most bizarre tools, with enough determination.
...know that the renderer does not a quality scene make. It doesn't matter whether you use a best of breed render or a cheasy, not-so-great render. If you're a good artist who knows how to make good use of lighting, color, layout, textures, and so forth, you will produce photorealistic work. If you're a sucky artist (as most 3D artists are) and you have this misconception that a great rendering and tool kit is going to save you... well, your work will blow.
The shittiest 3D art I've ever seen (stepping away from the whole "it's art!" idealogy) was done with Lightwave3D. Some of the best I've seen was done with Blender and Caligari trueSpace (an off the shelf package for $100 in some places).
It all comes back to the artists. The software is just a tool. If you don't know how to hammer a nail in straight, a $15,000 hammer won't help.
This issue is so dead it stinks. Software is not speech. It enjoys no first amendment protection at all.
You're so full of shit I can barely keep a level head discussing this. Software is most definitely speech, in one of its truest forms, no less.
The First Amendment gives and protects the rights of Americans to express ideas in a public forum through a variety of media. It gives us the power to speak ill of and contradict the interests of various establishments. It helps entities pursade others -- either individuals or groups -- to a particular point of view. It allows us to freely express knowledge and information. It allows us to freely entertain and seek entertainment freely. Now, you tell me how software does not fit into the category of free speech.
When it comes to speech, the language is irrelevant. It does not matter if you're speaking the Old English, Nihon'go, or C++.
Software is, in all senses, a collection of ideas and/or methods for doing any number of the things I mentioned previously. You're expressing them using a more formalized language than spoken languages, true. But nonetheless, you're trying to convey thoughts, information, entertain, etc.
If we conceed that software is not speech, a vast majority of what we take for granted today could easily be surpressed (anything open-source) or even made illegal to use (DeCSS, Adobe eBook readers, etc). Hopefully the courts will not see it as you do.
Here's behavior I caught on my Abit VP6 as it started to die.
First, I started getting rare APIC errors (CPU interrupts). They occurred in groups of 2-5. Later, they would be pumped out so rapidly that my system would freeze printing them to the log (or landing in deadlock). No fun.
Second, I noticed that CPU1 (2of2) began demonstrating temperature fluctuations. I thought the CPU itself might be going bad, so I did a simple experiment. I swapped the CPUs, and monitored the temperature again. No matter which chip was in the CPU1 socket, the temperature oscillated. Could this be dirty voltage on the board? I'm no EE, so I cannot speculate.
When I finally did replace the board, the capacitors did show some signs similar to my KA7 that failed. A yellow-ish residue seemed to be creaping out from between the seams at the top of some caps and around the rubber. The board had not burned up as quickly and violently as the KA7 did, but it looks the same.
So, look for carbon, leaks, or any other sign of decay on your caps. Otherwise, check for abnormalities like those described here.
I can finally vent about my misery! This experience ought to be useful to anyone who is currently in the market for a motherboard. Simply put, don't buy Abit.
About 1.5 years ago, I purchased two motherboards from Abit. This one for an 800MHz Athlon system, and this board for a dual, 733MHz Coppermine system. Last semeter, my KA7 failed slowly over time. At first, I thought it was the power supply because it seemed all the capasitors around the power regulator were fried (they were encrusted with the carbon of some substance that appeared to boil out of them and burn). I replaced my power supply and motherboard. A few weeks ago, I started having interrupt failures on my VP6 (APIC errors on both CPUs). I replaced the motherboard with a Gigabyte GA-6VTXD (sorry for the shameless plug, but Gigabyte denies deep linking, and this is where I got the board - a great buy). Turns out the VP6 also had fried capasitors and I *know* the PS in my that dual proc box is solid (a well tested Antec). The only two Abit mobos I've ever purchased burned out their capasitors. The moral of this story? Don't buy Abit. While this problem is wide spread, Abit seems to have a particular affliction.
Your trolling, sir, is graceless. The Apple-going-out-of-business category has some volumptuous, stunning, legendary trolls. Yet, this one falls flat on its face and is hardly convincing to even the most foolish of trollfoder.
You offered your climax right at the very start, but failed to repeat it over and over such as in the classic "BSD Is Dying!" troll. Shameful style!
Your substance is sorely lacking, insofar as your grounds for claiming Apple's demise lack creativity as well as facts! Next time, claim Apple will perish due to Steve Job's genitle herpes being spread to the MacOS X team. God's sake man! Try using your imagination!
It is absolutely pathetic that you got a first post, yet did not mention the words "frost", "frist", first", "fist", "prost", "prist", or "pist" anywhere in your troll.
This is such an abomination, I cannot comment further. As an expert troll who has filled/. forums for years and years with both anonymous and +1 trolls, I detest your miserable attempt.
Mplayer plays a plethora of media formats. Most of them are not Windows specific. It's quite (mostly) popular for watching DVDs and DivX encoded video. Are either of those "Windows media files"? Only if the MPAA has their way.
SAMBA (comunicating with Windows machines)
That kind of makes sense. But machines have got to interoperate, right? We have a need to be able to talk to any other computer, regardless of its OS. I don't think this fits your category.
Apache server (serving http documents to 98% of IE users + the rest)
This just doesn't make sense. It can serve documents to any web browser. How does this make it Windows inspired? Besides, before Microsoft broke law, the web was viewed by browsers that weren't IE. (Note that IE was inspired by *nix software development, Mosaic if you remember.)
OpenOffice reading and saving MS Word/Excel compatible files
By the way, OOo's native file formats are far superior to those of Microsoft's Office suite. The reason for the interoperability is so that people who need an inexpensive, portable office suite can easily move over. Again, not inspired by Microsoft.
GICU or GAIM: comunicating with Windows IMgrs.
So Windows is responsible for the advent of instant messaging on the Net? I think this happened with IRC a long time ago, and before that, `talk'... began on, you guessed it, *nix.
WineX: playing Windows games
There's nothing about games that makes them Windows, other than the fact that they were written so poorly as to not be portable. WineX is picking up the slack of poor game developers (both in skill and financially speaking) that won't develop for other platforms. Mac users have the same complaint.
Mozilla 1: at last being able to see the web IE users see it.
We've never had a need to impliment proprietary, broken Microsoft extensions to web standards. I'd much rather view the web without them. Even to this day, Mozilla still does not see the web how IE users see it because it is standards compliant (mostly). What IE users see isn't the web... it's Microsoft's own little thing.
I mean, ok you can do other stuff that does not involve Windows compatibility, but why then are these the most popular applications. Take away those apps, and our Linux dies in a month (my bet).
The only one you could take away that might even kill Linux is Apache. Linux is strongest in the server room where Mplayer, OOs, IM, WineX, and Mozilla should not even be found. Samba is debatable... I would never use it because it's a pathetic protocol. Linux is strong now because of its formidable server position. It's only the desktop that we're still weak on. Soon, that will be solved.
Incidently, Linux != open source. Instead, open source = {..., Linux,... }. The lines you're drawing between these various projects and how matter in the grand scheme seems to be based wholey on this concept of the survivability and marketablility of Linux. Everything you mentioned, with the exception of WineX, can run on any platform (Windows included). So, with that in mind, the issue is, well, a nonissue.
Know why? Because open source never has been, isn't, and never will be in competition with Microsoft. Ask Linus - he doesn't give a rats ass what Redmond or the world thinks about Linux. He just wants to make a good product, which is the crux of the issue.
Open source is not a business. It's not an establishment. It's only a set of ideals that are suited to fulfilling a set of needs. For example, people who use open source software have a need for inexpensive, dependable, stable, secure operating systems. As a result, several such operating systems have been produced from open source development efforts. Microsoft does not, cannot, and will never fulfill those needs. Therefore, open source software and ideals will always thrive, just as they have for several decades now. (This nonsense about making software proprietary is still a relatively new one in the computer industry... and it's showing that it will soon fail).
We're not in competition with Microsoft. We can just sit back, laugh, write good code, and use the execellent software we've created to complete our tasks and solve our problems. Meanwhile, they'll run around like mad, trying to compete with an entity that cannot be competed with, spending billions in the process while we go by without burning a single cent! Sure, some people use open source software to compete with Microsoft (RedHat, IBM, et al). But in the end, we are not a business and the fools at Microsoft don't know how to deal with it. Soon, they'll go the way of the dodo and that will be that.
Microsoft will fail because they cannot identify needs and fulfill them. All this time, they'll be busy spinning marketing campaigns, filling magazines with FUD... when they could have been developing quality, open code. I suppose the customer is their last priority. This is a business doomed to fail.
Now that's out of the way, let me remind you that there's a lot of truth to this often repeated statement. Palladium is, in a lot of ways, a cool, if horribly unoriginal technology (the concept of making software dependent on the presence of hardware to run has existed since dongles).
Regardless of how cool, funny, or "weak" it is as many of you claim, Palladium has two purposes. 1) Palladium is meant to make other deep-pocketed interests happy (more money for MS). 2) defeat any and all competition to Microsoft products.
It's very clear: Microsoft has the say-so in what code gets to execute on a Palladium-tainted computer. What code do you think will be allowed to execute?
You will argue: "It will be cracked." "We can stick with old computers." "This will not be accepted by businesses/consumers." But those arguments are either irrelevant or fall flat on their faces.
First of all, I agree. It will be cracked without a doubt. But do 99% of the users out there know how to use such cracks to free themselves? Do any of you crackers out there realize how complex this system is?
Second, we cannot stick with old computers. This is evident by the fact that there are hordes of users out there running 1GHz processors with half a gigabyte of RAM for the purposes of checking their email. Plus, software will always get more sophisticated and people will always want higher framerates, and so on. New computers will be purchased.
Last, of course consumers and businesses will buy up Palladium hardware! This is, without a doubt, the most absurd assumption anyone can make! "People don't want another DivX!" "People don't want to give up their rights!" Bullshit. People do not even know what their rights are. Not to forget that marketing spins already exist that are meant to convince people that they are getting something (increased security) when they are having something taken away. (Apologize to the guy who coined that phrase.)
Palladium is very real, and it is a very real threat. It will be adopted if it is allowed to continue. Even if we educate the public, it will press on (after all, users running Windows left and right, despite superior alternatives)? Sadly, I have no suggestions on how to deal with it... but we must certainly not take it as a laughing matter.
It is now official. Netcraft has confirmed: AOL is dying
Another more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered AOL community when IDC confirmed that AOL market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that AOL has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. AOL is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict AOL's future. The hand writing is on the wall: AOL faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for AOL because AOL is dying. Things are looking very bad for AOL. As many of us are already aware, AOL continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
AOL 8.0 is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time AOL 8.0 developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: AOL 8.0 is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
AOL 7.0 leader Theo states that there are 7,000,000 users of AOL 7.0. How many users of AOL 7.0 are there? Let's see. The number of AOL 8.0 versus AOL 7.0 posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7,000,000/5 = 1,400,000 AOL 7.0 users. AOL 6.0 posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of AOL 7.0 posts. Therefore there are about 700,000 users of AOL 6.0. A recent article put AOL 8.0 at about 80 percent of the AOL market. Therefore there are (7,000,000+1,400,000+700,000)*4 = 36,400,000 AOL 8.0 users. This is consistent with the number of AOL 8.0 Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Times Warner, abysmal sales and so on, AOL 8.0 went out of business and was taken over by AOL 5.0 who sell another troubled OS. Now AOL 5.0 is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that AOL has steadily declined in market share. AOL is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If AOL is to survive at all it will be among dilettante dabblers. AOL continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, AOL is dead.
Fact: AOL is dying
Take it in the spirit in which it's given. The story is a troll... so it deserves this.
OKay, I admit it! I've been a Linux user for years! You know, one of those communists who thinks that everything should be free and forgets to use deoderant. Recently, I was reading a totally unbiased technical article in a magazine that informed me that the competition just cannot stand up to Microsoft's (r) Windows (r) XP operating system.
Let me tell you how lost I have been all these years, using free, open-source software! What a waste of my life! As soon as I read about all the great features, I threw some clothes on (shoes too!) and ran out to my nearest CompUSA to buy a copy of Microsoft (r) Windows (r) XP Professional for about 400$US. I got home, ripped the shrink-wrap off, read over the draconian EULA (I don't mind giving up some freedoms, Windows (r) is just too great), and immediately got to installing.
After installation, I was unable to activate my copy of Microsoft (r) Windows (r) XP. Sure, there was a little hic-up here, but after all, you sometimes have to make sacrifices for quality! After about a month of not being able to use my computer, customer support finally just said I could use a "back-door" activation code. How wonderful that Microsoft are helping me out at their own peril!
It only took me about three months to get me up and running! Girl Scout's honor!
More Crashes, Less Work
Microsoft (r) Windows (r) XP lets me relax more through my busy work day. With continuous crashes and reboots, I can spend more time sipping coffee than doing my job! Microsoft (r) Windows (r) XP also ensures that the work I do manage to get done is of the highest possible quality. I demand that I be empowered to rewrite a document I lost four times so I can be certain that it is very refined.
More Software Flexibility
Previously, I had access to hundreds of thousands of free software products. But they were free, and we all know that anything that's free is worth nothing! Now I can go out and spend anywhere from 50$US to 5000$US dollars on a box with a CD-ROM disc in it! With a cost like that, it ought to be some really good software!
Final Comments
If it wasn't for Microsoft (r) Windows (r) XP, I wouldn't bathe, use deoderant, or wear clothes all day. I would just sit around and stink, rotting in my house, getting fat! Thanks to my switch to Windows (r), I'm healthy and have a great life! Thanks Microsoft (r)!
And OT, I find it really weird to see ANY Microsoft ad on/. at all.
I've been noticing more and more of these as of late. I've counted more Microsoft VisualStudio.NET adds here than from any other single vendor. It's really distressing for a few reasons. Slashdot is supposed to be a bastion of open source. Freedom in computing. Instead, its helping support the entity that is single most determined to destroy everything we have.
People say: "we're not at war with Microsoft. Free and proprietary software need to co-exist. Blah blah blah."
New flash people: we are at war. Even if we don't want to trounce them, they want to trounce us - badly. Any foothold we give them (like letting them peddle their products to people who may not yet understand the issues) is a loss on our part.
Advirtising Microsoft on/. makes us largely hipocrites. I think we need to abandon this "community".
Pfff.. it would also be better if people informed microsoft of _every_ exploit before releasing virii in the wild:)
I know of many examples, but it's minutes before I leave for work and I cannot cite them. But I'm hoping that you (and many others) are aware that many hackers who have found exploits in Microsoft products do inform Microsoft of the problem before releasing the exploit. Microsoft turn around and ignore them and do nothing until the hacker releases the exploit out into the open. With Microsoft, you don't get anything patched unless it makes a bad PR spin.
One such example of this was the Win32 message system allowing code to elevate its privs by sending commands to higher-priv'ed processes. It was posted to/. a few weeks ago.
A bank robbery is a different type of intrusion. You cannot threaten a computer to give you access. An armed bank robbery is a failure of humans, not security systems. I'm sure all the cameras and locking mechanisms on doors and vaults at a bank work just fine in an armed robbery. The humans unlock them out of self-preservation and the mechanisms do exactly what they are requested.
Exploiting a vulnerability like this is similar to walking down the ally behind the bank and finding an unlocked door that takes you straight into the vault. Some people (other politics aside such as "who would want to help such a stupid bank!?") would inform the bank, hoping to increase it's security. Typically in open source, when we find unlocked doors, we tell the maintainers as soon as possible. It's peer review.
I am not suggesting we do not release exploits though. Worms like this are a good practice run (and a great way of informing the sysadmins they need updates). *shrug*
1. That most system admins out there are bright enough to keep their machines up to date with the latest patches.
2. Whoever is writing these worms knows how much damage they're doing to open source. It would have been preferrable to inform the OpenSSL people first, wait a month, then release the worm.
Of course, by the time you read this, the bug will have been patched.;)
How is this off topic?
on
UT2003 LiveCD
·
· Score: 2
This post is precisely ontopic. We're talking about run-off-the-disc Linux distros in this thread. If someone posts a link with information about another such tool for accomplishing this, it's informative. Maybe some people out there want to do something similar, but without using Gentoo.
It'd be much better to have the scientists pulverize some potential load-bearing walls instead of just working their way in through cooridors that are already in place. It's just a pyramid after all - who cares if we destroy it in the process of revealing its secrets. There's plenty more after we're through with this one!
NVIDIA uses the same codebase for ther Windows, Mac OS ?, and Linux drivers. This same codebase will also be used for their FreeBSD drivers to come. Their unified driver architecture ensures that every platform the card runs on gets the latest version of the code and can take advantage of each card's features. So this is definitely a few notches above ATI who won't even produce drivers for my platform, let alone release full specifications to the public to write them.
As for the complaint that NVIDIA is no better than ATI because of a binary driver release: that is not NVIDIA's fault. NVIDIA tries to make as much of their driver open source as possible (which is kind of a necessity because of the plethora of kernel configurations out there). However, the closed-source portions are kept closed because of SGI's patents on OpenGL. Assign blame where blame is due, please.
Slashdot Mirror
The same could easily be said about Blender's UI (at first). The UI is irrelevant. Eventually, you learn hwo to use it and adapt accordingly. I am not recommending trueSpace in anyway, but nonetheless, people do learn how to use even the most bizarre tools, with enough determination.
...know that the renderer does not a quality scene make. It doesn't matter whether you use a best of breed render or a cheasy, not-so-great render. If you're a good artist who knows how to make good use of lighting, color, layout, textures, and so forth, you will produce photorealistic work. If you're a sucky artist (as most 3D artists are) and you have this misconception that a great rendering and tool kit is going to save you... well, your work will blow.
The shittiest 3D art I've ever seen (stepping away from the whole "it's art!" idealogy) was done with Lightwave3D. Some of the best I've seen was done with Blender and Caligari trueSpace (an off the shelf package for $100 in some places).
It all comes back to the artists. The software is just a tool. If you don't know how to hammer a nail in straight, a $15,000 hammer won't help.
This issue is so dead it stinks. Software is not speech. It enjoys no first amendment protection at all.
You're so full of shit I can barely keep a level head discussing this. Software is most definitely speech, in one of its truest forms, no less.
The First Amendment gives and protects the rights of Americans to express ideas in a public forum through a variety of media. It gives us the power to speak ill of and contradict the interests of various establishments. It helps entities pursade others -- either individuals or groups -- to a particular point of view. It allows us to freely express knowledge and information. It allows us to freely entertain and seek entertainment freely. Now, you tell me how software does not fit into the category of free speech.
When it comes to speech, the language is irrelevant. It does not matter if you're speaking the Old English, Nihon'go, or C++.
Software is, in all senses, a collection of ideas and/or methods for doing any number of the things I mentioned previously. You're expressing them using a more formalized language than spoken languages, true. But nonetheless, you're trying to convey thoughts, information, entertain, etc.
If we conceed that software is not speech, a vast majority of what we take for granted today could easily be surpressed (anything open-source) or even made illegal to use (DeCSS, Adobe eBook readers, etc). Hopefully the courts will not see it as you do.
Here's behavior I caught on my Abit VP6 as it started to die.
First, I started getting rare APIC errors (CPU interrupts). They occurred in groups of 2-5. Later, they would be pumped out so rapidly that my system would freeze printing them to the log (or landing in deadlock). No fun.
Second, I noticed that CPU1 (2of2) began demonstrating temperature fluctuations. I thought the CPU itself might be going bad, so I did a simple experiment. I swapped the CPUs, and monitored the temperature again. No matter which chip was in the CPU1 socket, the temperature oscillated. Could this be dirty voltage on the board? I'm no EE, so I cannot speculate.
When I finally did replace the board, the capacitors did show some signs similar to my KA7 that failed. A yellow-ish residue seemed to be creaping out from between the seams at the top of some caps and around the rubber. The board had not burned up as quickly and violently as the KA7 did, but it looks the same.
So, look for carbon, leaks, or any other sign of decay on your caps. Otherwise, check for abnormalities like those described here.
I botched the link tag for the VP6 board. For the curious, go here.
(If there is an error in your post, well, you should have hit the preview button!)
i've never liked caps... i knew they were bad news from the start.
good to hear that all these aol'ers could be exposed stuff that explodes
I can finally vent about my misery! This experience ought to be useful to anyone who is currently in the market for a motherboard. Simply put, don't buy Abit.
About 1.5 years ago, I purchased two motherboards from Abit. This one for an 800MHz Athlon system, and this board for a dual, 733MHz Coppermine system. Last semeter, my KA7 failed slowly over time. At first, I thought it was the power supply because it seemed all the capasitors around the power regulator were fried (they were encrusted with the carbon of some substance that appeared to boil out of them and burn). I replaced my power supply and motherboard. A few weeks ago, I started having interrupt failures on my VP6 (APIC errors on both CPUs). I replaced the motherboard with a Gigabyte GA-6VTXD (sorry for the shameless plug, but Gigabyte denies deep linking, and this is where I got the board - a great buy). Turns out the VP6 also had fried capasitors and I *know* the PS in my that dual proc box is solid (a well tested Antec). The only two Abit mobos I've ever purchased burned out their capasitors. The moral of this story? Don't buy Abit. While this problem is wide spread, Abit seems to have a particular affliction.
you failed to properly spell "genitals".
Your trolling, sir, is graceless. The Apple-going-out-of-business category has some volumptuous, stunning, legendary trolls. Yet, this one falls flat on its face and is hardly convincing to even the most foolish of trollfoder.
/. forums for years and years with both anonymous and +1 trolls, I detest your miserable attempt.
You offered your climax right at the very start, but failed to repeat it over and over such as in the classic "BSD Is Dying!" troll. Shameful style!
Your substance is sorely lacking, insofar as your grounds for claiming Apple's demise lack creativity as well as facts! Next time, claim Apple will perish due to Steve Job's genitle herpes being spread to the MacOS X team. God's sake man! Try using your imagination!
It is absolutely pathetic that you got a first post, yet did not mention the words "frost", "frist", first", "fist", "prost", "prist", or "pist" anywhere in your troll.
This is such an abomination, I cannot comment further. As an expert troll who has filled
Mplayer (playing windows media files)
..., Linux, ... }. The lines you're drawing between these various projects and how matter in the grand scheme seems to be based wholey on this concept of the survivability and marketablility of Linux. Everything you mentioned, with the exception of WineX, can run on any platform (Windows included). So, with that in mind, the issue is, well, a nonissue.
Mplayer plays a plethora of media formats. Most of them are not Windows specific. It's quite (mostly) popular for watching DVDs and DivX encoded video. Are either of those "Windows media files"? Only if the MPAA has their way.
SAMBA (comunicating with Windows machines)
That kind of makes sense. But machines have got to interoperate, right? We have a need to be able to talk to any other computer, regardless of its OS. I don't think this fits your category.
Apache server (serving http documents to 98% of IE users + the rest)
This just doesn't make sense. It can serve documents to any web browser. How does this make it Windows inspired? Besides, before Microsoft broke law, the web was viewed by browsers that weren't IE. (Note that IE was inspired by *nix software development, Mosaic if you remember.)
OpenOffice reading and saving MS Word/Excel compatible files
By the way, OOo's native file formats are far superior to those of Microsoft's Office suite. The reason for the interoperability is so that people who need an inexpensive, portable office suite can easily move over. Again, not inspired by Microsoft.
GICU or GAIM: comunicating with Windows IMgrs.
So Windows is responsible for the advent of instant messaging on the Net? I think this happened with IRC a long time ago, and before that, `talk'... began on, you guessed it, *nix.
WineX: playing Windows games
There's nothing about games that makes them Windows, other than the fact that they were written so poorly as to not be portable. WineX is picking up the slack of poor game developers (both in skill and financially speaking) that won't develop for other platforms. Mac users have the same complaint.
Mozilla 1: at last being able to see the web IE users see it.
We've never had a need to impliment proprietary, broken Microsoft extensions to web standards. I'd much rather view the web without them. Even to this day, Mozilla still does not see the web how IE users see it because it is standards compliant (mostly). What IE users see isn't the web... it's Microsoft's own little thing.
I mean, ok you can do other stuff that does not involve Windows compatibility, but why then are these the most popular applications. Take away those apps, and our Linux dies in a month (my bet).
The only one you could take away that might even kill Linux is Apache. Linux is strongest in the server room where Mplayer, OOs, IM, WineX, and Mozilla should not even be found. Samba is debatable... I would never use it because it's a pathetic protocol. Linux is strong now because of its formidable server position. It's only the desktop that we're still weak on. Soon, that will be solved.
Incidently, Linux != open source. Instead, open source = {
Know why? Because open source never has been, isn't, and never will be in competition with Microsoft. Ask Linus - he doesn't give a rats ass what Redmond or the world thinks about Linux. He just wants to make a good product, which is the crux of the issue.
Open source is not a business. It's not an establishment. It's only a set of ideals that are suited to fulfilling a set of needs. For example, people who use open source software have a need for inexpensive, dependable, stable, secure operating systems. As a result, several such operating systems have been produced from open source development efforts. Microsoft does not, cannot, and will never fulfill those needs. Therefore, open source software and ideals will always thrive, just as they have for several decades now. (This nonsense about making software proprietary is still a relatively new one in the computer industry... and it's showing that it will soon fail).
We're not in competition with Microsoft. We can just sit back, laugh, write good code, and use the execellent software we've created to complete our tasks and solve our problems. Meanwhile, they'll run around like mad, trying to compete with an entity that cannot be competed with, spending billions in the process while we go by without burning a single cent! Sure, some people use open source software to compete with Microsoft (RedHat, IBM, et al). But in the end, we are not a business and the fools at Microsoft don't know how to deal with it. Soon, they'll go the way of the dodo and that will be that.
Microsoft will fail because they cannot identify needs and fulfill them. All this time, they'll be busy spinning marketing campaigns, filling magazines with FUD... when they could have been developing quality, open code. I suppose the customer is their last priority. This is a business doomed to fail.
"Microsoft is evil, blah blah blah..."
Now that's out of the way, let me remind you that there's a lot of truth to this often repeated statement. Palladium is, in a lot of ways, a cool, if horribly unoriginal technology (the concept of making software dependent on the presence of hardware to run has existed since dongles).
Regardless of how cool, funny, or "weak" it is as many of you claim, Palladium has two purposes. 1) Palladium is meant to make other deep-pocketed interests happy (more money for MS). 2) defeat any and all competition to Microsoft products.
It's very clear: Microsoft has the say-so in what code gets to execute on a Palladium-tainted computer. What code do you think will be allowed to execute?
You will argue: "It will be cracked." "We can stick with old computers." "This will not be accepted by businesses/consumers." But those arguments are either irrelevant or fall flat on their faces.
First of all, I agree. It will be cracked without a doubt. But do 99% of the users out there know how to use such cracks to free themselves? Do any of you crackers out there realize how complex this system is?
Second, we cannot stick with old computers. This is evident by the fact that there are hordes of users out there running 1GHz processors with half a gigabyte of RAM for the purposes of checking their email. Plus, software will always get more sophisticated and people will always want higher framerates, and so on. New computers will be purchased.
Last, of course consumers and businesses will buy up Palladium hardware! This is, without a doubt, the most absurd assumption anyone can make! "People don't want another DivX!" "People don't want to give up their rights!" Bullshit. People do not even know what their rights are. Not to forget that marketing spins already exist that are meant to convince people that they are getting something (increased security) when they are having something taken away. (Apologize to the guy who coined that phrase.)
Palladium is very real, and it is a very real threat. It will be adopted if it is allowed to continue. Even if we educate the public, it will press on (after all, users running Windows left and right, despite superior alternatives)? Sadly, I have no suggestions on how to deal with it... but we must certainly not take it as a laughing matter.
It is now official. Netcraft has confirmed: AOL is dying
Another more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered AOL community when IDC confirmed that AOL market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that AOL has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. AOL is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict AOL's future. The hand writing is on the wall: AOL faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for AOL because AOL is dying. Things are looking very bad for AOL. As many of us are already aware, AOL continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
AOL 8.0 is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time AOL 8.0 developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: AOL 8.0 is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
AOL 7.0 leader Theo states that there are 7,000,000 users of AOL 7.0. How many users of AOL 7.0 are there? Let's see. The number of AOL 8.0 versus AOL 7.0 posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7,000,000/5 = 1,400,000 AOL 7.0 users. AOL 6.0 posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of AOL 7.0 posts. Therefore there are about 700,000 users of AOL 6.0. A recent article put AOL 8.0 at about 80 percent of the AOL market. Therefore there are (7,000,000+1,400,000+700,000)*4 = 36,400,000 AOL 8.0 users. This is consistent with the number of AOL 8.0 Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Times Warner, abysmal sales and so on, AOL 8.0 went out of business and was taken over by AOL 5.0 who sell another troubled OS. Now AOL 5.0 is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that AOL has steadily declined in market share. AOL is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If AOL is to survive at all it will be among dilettante dabblers. AOL continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, AOL is dead.
Fact: AOL is dying
Take it in the spirit in which it's given. The story is a troll... so it deserves this.
Lies, FUD, bad software (let's not get started), breaking the law... Where does it end!?
Microsoft have so much egg on their face that this they're starting to look like that nasty chick in a cheap porno!
People still trust these assholes?
Here's what I submitted as my XP switch story. :-)
P G? x=x&dasite=GETTYIMAGES&dareq=1A0C1F181E05 D2337394D32324055454243585F414E
You can use my personal photo from this web page:
http://delivery.gettyimages.com/comp/AA046139.J
8031402
My name is Linda Lee and here's my story!
"WindowsXP is great!"
OKay, I admit it! I've been a Linux user for years! You know, one of
those communists who thinks that everything should be free and forgets
to use deoderant. Recently, I was reading a totally unbiased
technical article in a magazine that informed me that the competition
just cannot stand up to Microsoft's (r) Windows (r) XP operating
system.
Let me tell you how lost I have been all these years, using free,
open-source software! What a waste of my life! As soon as I read
about all the great features, I threw some clothes on (shoes too!) and
ran out to my nearest CompUSA to buy a copy of Microsoft (r) Windows
(r) XP Professional for about 400$US. I got home, ripped the
shrink-wrap off, read over the draconian EULA (I don't mind giving up
some freedoms, Windows (r) is just too great), and immediately got to
installing.
After installation, I was unable to activate my copy of Microsoft (r)
Windows (r) XP. Sure, there was a little hic-up here, but after all,
you sometimes have to make sacrifices for quality! After about a
month of not being able to use my computer, customer support finally
just said I could use a "back-door" activation code. How wonderful
that Microsoft are helping me out at their own peril!
It only took me about three months to get me up and running! Girl
Scout's honor!
More Crashes, Less Work
Microsoft (r) Windows (r) XP lets me relax more through my busy work
day. With continuous crashes and reboots, I can spend more time
sipping coffee than doing my job! Microsoft (r) Windows (r) XP also
ensures that the work I do manage to get done is of the highest
possible quality. I demand that I be empowered to rewrite a document
I lost four times so I can be certain that it is very refined.
More Software Flexibility
Previously, I had access to hundreds of thousands of free software
products. But they were free, and we all know that anything that's
free is worth nothing! Now I can go out and spend anywhere from 50$US
to 5000$US dollars on a box with a CD-ROM disc in it! With a cost
like that, it ought to be some really good software!
Final Comments
If it wasn't for Microsoft (r) Windows (r) XP, I wouldn't bathe, use
deoderant, or wear clothes all day. I would just sit around and
stink, rotting in my house, getting fat! Thanks to my switch to
Windows (r), I'm healthy and have a great life! Thanks Microsoft (r)!
And OT, I find it really weird to see ANY Microsoft ad on /. at all.
/. makes us largely hipocrites. I think we need to abandon this "community".
I've been noticing more and more of these as of late. I've counted more Microsoft VisualStudio.NET adds here than from any other single vendor. It's really distressing for a few reasons. Slashdot is supposed to be a bastion of open source. Freedom in computing. Instead, its helping support the entity that is single most determined to destroy everything we have.
People say: "we're not at war with Microsoft. Free and proprietary software need to co-exist. Blah blah blah."
New flash people: we are at war. Even if we don't want to trounce them, they want to trounce us - badly. Any foothold we give them (like letting them peddle their products to people who may not yet understand the issues) is a loss on our part.
Advirtising Microsoft on
...with being associated with communism in the past. Great, now no "red-blooded, patriot capitalist" is going to take us seriously. :)
Pfff.. it would also be better if people informed microsoft of _every_ exploit before releasing virii in the wild :)
/. a few weeks ago.
I know of many examples, but it's minutes before I leave for work and I cannot cite them. But I'm hoping that you (and many others) are aware that many hackers who have found exploits in Microsoft products do inform Microsoft of the problem before releasing the exploit. Microsoft turn around and ignore them and do nothing until the hacker releases the exploit out into the open. With Microsoft, you don't get anything patched unless it makes a bad PR spin.
One such example of this was the Win32 message system allowing code to elevate its privs by sending commands to higher-priv'ed processes. It was posted to
A bank robbery is a different type of intrusion. You cannot threaten a computer to give you access. An armed bank robbery is a failure of humans, not security systems. I'm sure all the cameras and locking mechanisms on doors and vaults at a bank work just fine in an armed robbery. The humans unlock them out of self-preservation and the mechanisms do exactly what they are requested.
Exploiting a vulnerability like this is similar to walking down the ally behind the bank and finding an unlocked door that takes you straight into the vault. Some people (other politics aside such as "who would want to help such a stupid bank!?") would inform the bank, hoping to increase it's security. Typically in open source, when we find unlocked doors, we tell the maintainers as soon as possible. It's peer review.
I am not suggesting we do not release exploits though. Worms like this are a good practice run (and a great way of informing the sysadmins they need updates). *shrug*
1. That most system admins out there are bright enough to keep their machines up to date with the latest patches.
;)
2. Whoever is writing these worms knows how much damage they're doing to open source. It would have been preferrable to inform the OpenSSL people first, wait a month, then release the worm.
Of course, by the time you read this, the bug will have been patched.
"Do not hump the laser."
Will we ever get a good single sign-on solution?
How about username and password over SSL?
This post is precisely ontopic. We're talking about run-off-the-disc Linux distros in this thread. If someone posts a link with information about another such tool for accomplishing this, it's informative. Maybe some people out there want to do something similar, but without using Gentoo.
Moderators, try using some objectivity! Sheesh.
It'd be much better to have the scientists pulverize some potential load-bearing walls instead of just working their way in through cooridors that are already in place. It's just a pyramid after all - who cares if we destroy it in the process of revealing its secrets. There's plenty more after we're through with this one!
NVIDIA uses the same codebase for ther Windows, Mac OS ?, and Linux drivers. This same codebase will also be used for their FreeBSD drivers to come. Their unified driver architecture ensures that every platform the card runs on gets the latest version of the code and can take advantage of each card's features. So this is definitely a few notches above ATI who won't even produce drivers for my platform, let alone release full specifications to the public to write them.
As for the complaint that NVIDIA is no better than ATI because of a binary driver release: that is not NVIDIA's fault. NVIDIA tries to make as much of their driver open source as possible (which is kind of a necessity because of the plethora of kernel configurations out there). However, the closed-source portions are kept closed because of SGI's patents on OpenGL. Assign blame where blame is due, please.