What's dead about that? It remains the predominant medium for music and software sales, and shows every sign of continuing to do so for a year or two at least. Although I suppose you could claim that the concept of "paying for music" was submerging...
If you want long-term security, I suggest you print everything out. Ink on paper isn't bad in terms of longevity - we have vast numbers of readable manuscripts from the first millenium, but how many Roman CD-ROMs have survived?
Where organic technology simply isn't good enough, I recommend inscribing your mission-critical data on stone tablets. A diamond-tipped dot-matrix printer should do the trick.
> And now how much slower is it than CDE, I wonder...
Not necessarily much. I don't use KDE enough to comment authoritatively, but I haven't noticed recent versions being significantly slower than older ones. Remember that for every new feature they add, they optimise several old ones.
No, try again. FREE SOFTWARE development in KDE is free forever and can never be closed; but what the poster you're replying to was pointing out was that COMMERCIAL, closed-source applications using KDE stand a risk of being burned if TrollTech is taken over by someone greedy.
You're welcome not to give a damn about closed-source applications. It's still a valid concern.
> Just look at their benchmarks and read carefully. They did benchmark gcc 2.95 against 3.3.1.
Just look at their benchmarks and read carefully. What they benchmarked was gcc 3.3.1 compiled with gcc 3.2 against gcc 3.3.1 compiled with gcc 2.95. Not quite the same thing.
Personally I think the entire current e-mail system should be just scrapped totally, and a completely new system should be devised. Something that would interface well with mobile phones, mobile computers, IM software, web... Something that has strong security and authentication built into it, making it impossible to make a hacked home PC into a spam relay. Something that would allow smart and easy delivery/distribution of attachments. Yet something that would be easy to implement and easy (addresses especially) for end-users.
Excellent idea. Let us know when you've implemented it and we'll come along and poke holes in it.
> Also, the sky is blue, and the Earth is round. Just some other obvious things you might've also missed.
You lie! I just looked out of the window, and the sky is most definitely black. As for your other unsupported claim, I suggest you have a look at the truth and tell me if you can still believe these capitalist lies.
> While OO is good-great at compatibility... its not *perfect*.
Absolutely true. As an example of an area still lacking, I'm pretty sure there's no automatic way to convert your VBA macros into StarBasic, even though the two are based on the same programming language and of comparable power.
He's referring to the console that you if you switch into a different virtual terminal while running X. But virtual terminals are a solution to the problem of multitasking in a non-windowing environment, and therefore irrelevant in Windows. (You can simulate them in Windows by switching your console windows to full-screen mode anyway.)
Er, did you notice that FreeBSD still did exceedingly well in his benchmark, and he went out of his way to praise its performance at every opportunity?
Does it not strike you that if this unsuitable debug-ridden beta nearly manages to keep up Linux 2.6, that might imply that FreeBSD 5.x-STABLE, when it appears, could perform as well or better?
Much as I dislike stereotyping BSD users as paranoid, your ability to take an excellent benchmark result, accompanied by considerable praise, as an unforgivable insult impresses me.
> You mean crash-rates caused by other applications in an OS that probably still doesn't have memory management implemented effectively?
"Probably"? Come on, if you must attack Windows, please at least criticise one of its genuine bad points - it's not like there's any shortage. If we're going to bash companies because their operating systems USED to have poor memory management, I think Apple will probably be coming off worse.
> Back to the main point, which you have totally missed: a kernel alone does not an OS make.
On the contrary - he answered that point perfectly, and in this way:
IT IS POSSIBLE TO USE LINUX AS YOUR PRIMARY OS WITHOUT USING A SINGLE GNU TOOL ON A REGULAR BASIS.
Please excuse the shouting, I just wanted to make sure you didn't miss the point this time round.
The GNU portion of GNU/Linux, with the major exception of glibc, is useful only to command-line power users. If you're running KDE, and using it like most people use Windows, then the chances are you're NOT USING MUCH GNU SOFTWARE. Therefore, the logical name for it - based on RMS' arguments - would be "KDE/Linux", since Linux is after all only the kernel, and you wouldn't have much of an operating system without KDE.
So why is it that "GNU/Linux" advocates always claim that it's logical to call it GNU/Linux (even if you're not using the GNU tools much if at all), but ridiculous to call it KDE/Linux (even if you're using KDE on a daily basis for all your basic OS functionality)? Don't ask me. I think I'll just carry on calling it Linux, since the Linux kernel is what distinguishes it from similar operating systems like, well, GNU/Hurd for example. Or (to bring this back on topic) BSD.
> I download cracks to games I legally own because it's the only way I can play with a backup copy of the cd.
You should use Daemon Tools (www.daemon-tools.cc); it lets you play from most backup CDs without a crack, which should save you the trouble of dodging all the popups, porn ads, and spyware you find on most crackz sites.
Without some form of orbital countermeasures, land based objectives would be sitting ducks for all kinds of mischief......bioweapon packets launched from satellites, etc. etc.
Well, I, for one, welcome our new walking plant overlords.
Slashdot Mirror
> How about the pre-recorded compact disc?
What's dead about that? It remains the predominant medium for music and software sales, and shows every sign of continuing to do so for a year or two at least. Although I suppose you could claim that the concept of "paying for music" was submerging...
If you want long-term security, I suggest you print everything out. Ink on paper isn't bad in terms of longevity - we have vast numbers of readable manuscripts from the first millenium, but how many Roman CD-ROMs have survived?
Where organic technology simply isn't good enough, I recommend inscribing your mission-critical data on stone tablets. A diamond-tipped dot-matrix printer should do the trick.
> And now how much slower is it than CDE, I wonder...
Not necessarily much. I don't use KDE enough to comment authoritatively, but I haven't noticed recent versions being significantly slower than older ones. Remember that for every new feature they add, they optimise several old ones.
No, try again. FREE SOFTWARE development in KDE is free forever and can never be closed; but what the poster you're replying to was pointing out was that COMMERCIAL, closed-source applications using KDE stand a risk of being burned if TrollTech is taken over by someone greedy.
You're welcome not to give a damn about closed-source applications. It's still a valid concern.
> Just look at their benchmarks and read carefully. They did benchmark gcc 2.95 against 3.3.1.
Just look at their benchmarks and read carefully. What they benchmarked was gcc 3.3.1 compiled with gcc 3.2 against gcc 3.3.1 compiled with gcc 2.95. Not quite the same thing.
Excellent idea. Let us know when you've implemented it and we'll come along and poke holes in it.
I came up with [house; log; cart] (all three can be made of wood).
Great - for those among your users who can (a) send email from "mailto" links (i.e. don't use webmail), and (b) use Javascript-capable browsers.
Too bad about everyone else. But I suppose none of them have anything interesting to say to you anyway.
> Also, the sky is blue, and the Earth is round. Just some other obvious things you might've also missed.
You lie! I just looked out of the window, and the sky is most definitely black. As for your other unsupported claim, I suggest you have a look at the truth and tell me if you can still believe these capitalist lies.
> The next ad for MS claimed "Download free code and boost your productivity". Well, ok, I might just do that by downloading Debian.
But doesn't Debian cost $699...?
> While OO is good-great at compatibility... its not *perfect*.
Absolutely true. As an example of an area still lacking, I'm pretty sure there's no automatic way to convert your VBA macros into StarBasic, even though the two are based on the same programming language and of comparable power.
He's referring to the console that you if you switch into a different virtual terminal while running X. But virtual terminals are a solution to the problem of multitasking in a non-windowing environment, and therefore irrelevant in Windows. (You can simulate them in Windows by switching your console windows to full-screen mode anyway.)
> They list 'Management tools could be better' as a problem with linux. What, do the admins not like vi? (or emacs)
You got it.
From the point of view of an MSCE, vi and emacs are incredible applications -- in the same way that Stonehenge is an incredible bit of architecture.
Er, did you notice that FreeBSD still did exceedingly well in his benchmark, and he went out of his way to praise its performance at every opportunity?
Does it not strike you that if this unsuitable debug-ridden beta nearly manages to keep up Linux 2.6, that might imply that FreeBSD 5.x-STABLE, when it appears, could perform as well or better?
Much as I dislike stereotyping BSD users as paranoid, your ability to take an excellent benchmark result, accompanied by considerable praise, as an unforgivable insult impresses me.
> You mean crash-rates caused by other applications in an OS that probably still doesn't have memory management implemented effectively?
"Probably"? Come on, if you must attack Windows, please at least criticise one of its genuine bad points - it's not like there's any shortage. If we're going to bash companies because their operating systems USED to have poor memory management, I think Apple will probably be coming off worse.
He was modded into oblivion for posting a standard troll, not for slamming Linux. But I hope you knew that. ;)
The warning is reasonable, for the reasons you state. The word "contaminated", however, is not reasonable: it smacks of FUD and flamewars.
It also suggests that the ext2 code was once "healthy", but unfortunately "caught" the dreaded GPL. Not quite the case, methinks.
> Have you stopped beating your wife yet?
/. users: "I'm not married, you insensitive clod!")
To which the correct answer is simple: "I have never beaten my wife." So much for the trick question.
(Alternative answer for
> Back to the main point, which you have totally missed: a kernel alone does not an OS make.
On the contrary - he answered that point perfectly, and in this way:
IT IS POSSIBLE TO USE LINUX AS YOUR PRIMARY OS WITHOUT USING A SINGLE GNU TOOL ON A REGULAR BASIS.
Please excuse the shouting, I just wanted to make sure you didn't miss the point this time round.
The GNU portion of GNU/Linux, with the major exception of glibc, is useful only to command-line power users. If you're running KDE, and using it like most people use Windows, then the chances are you're NOT USING MUCH GNU SOFTWARE. Therefore, the logical name for it - based on RMS' arguments - would be "KDE/Linux", since Linux is after all only the kernel, and you wouldn't have much of an operating system without KDE.
So why is it that "GNU/Linux" advocates always claim that it's logical to call it GNU/Linux (even if you're not using the GNU tools much if at all), but ridiculous to call it KDE/Linux (even if you're using KDE on a daily basis for all your basic OS functionality)? Don't ask me. I think I'll just carry on calling it Linux, since the Linux kernel is what distinguishes it from similar operating systems like, well, GNU/Hurd for example. Or (to bring this back on topic) BSD.
> Hey, how do I find out if I am one of the "elite"?
If you have to ask...
I assume he means maturity in the sense of cheese: the most obvious difference is that it stinks.
> Who doesn't Michael insult in that l'il editorial blip?
Well, me, for starters, given that I don't have any compsci qualifications OR an MBA.
Or, to put it another way, I don't have a beard and I do know what TCP/IP is.
> If you wanted to watch the advertising supported channels only, you still have to pay the licence fee.
If you want to watch the advertising supported channels only, you need your head examined.
> I download cracks to games I legally own because it's the only way I can play with a backup copy of the cd.
You should use Daemon Tools (www.daemon-tools.cc); it lets you play from most backup CDs without a crack, which should save you the trouble of dodging all the popups, porn ads, and spyware you find on most crackz sites.