I'm so relieved. I think about this daily. It's much more of a concern to me than going bald prematurely, being impotent, or being intellectually feeble.
There's a good reason for that. 10 years ago, there -wasn't- any comercially available digital cameras, high-resolution scanners, or photo quality color printers. What little there was was well over the head of all but the richest folks. It was all industrial and damned expensive. Your logic is flawed.
apparently it hasn't occured to you that slashdot.org is essentially a personal web page of rob malda and gang.
the point that's being made is, people with interests should publish them in an open fashion so that people with similar interests would congregate. Improve the internet culture.
If you're doing something cool (building a robot, maybe), put up some information on it. we might want to see it, and google will find it for us. My impression is that it applies more accurately to geeks than to anyone else... I mean, we're the ones that can pretty much effortlessly make the things, afterall.
I know that out here in the Midwest US, it's pronounced, "r-oot-er". I'm apt to pronounce it "r-ow-ter" because I'm silly, I guess - though I try and pronounce it 'r-oot-er' so I don't get any confused looks. If I recall correctly, "r-ow-ter" is how it's pronounced on some parts of the East Coast. I don't know where else I'd pick it up (being as that's where I grew up).
It's like the difference between "route 66" and "route 66". Different dialects pronounce it differently. "garage" and "garage", etc.
That tactic is true, but I can see it backfiring on them in two possible ways.
One, RMS claims (and proves) that he was falsely named, and that there might be some sort of karma dock in the judges' minds (or judge's mind) of SCO's intent, efficiency, and even their basic competency. Possibly he'd claim that he has nothing to do with a Linux operating system. He has dabbled with some userland and libraries for GNU/Linux based operating systems, though.:P
Two, that RMS might actually get into court on this case, and is able to restrain himself. This would, IMO, be hillarious. He knows the law well, as he's demonstrated, and what's more, he seems to be able to play quite well at the 'lawyer word definition/twisting game'. I think he might be able to act in a civil manner in a court of law, too; we're not talking about some convention or debate, here. We're talking about a court of law. As vigilant as Stallman is about GNU/Linux advocacy from a law perspective, you'd think he'd have the diligency to represent GNU/Linux to the fullest extent possible.
I've got a custom knoppix CD image. It's fairly minimal, with only mozilla, KDE, konq, and OOo. Then I simply have a little script that will mount an NFS share and then dd an image to hda1. easy as pie.
You could alternatively do it with something non-visual, but if it's a user's workstation, I like to be able to give them a little flavor of linux while their workstation heals itself.:) of course, they're not likely to do any work at this time (or any other time, really), so hopefully they don't have any actual paperwork to be doing.:)
Whether it was intended as an attack on open source or not, does not matter. THe end result is that many people even on ye ol' mighty and literate slashdot have taken it as saying such, and countless other literate people will as well. *cough*
Well, technically speaking, nothing is intuitive. Humans learn things based off of relevance to things they already know. So intuitiveness of something is relative to one's life experiences. For instance, a jungle dweller would probably think a computer is magical, and worship it. The thought of inputing things with a keyboard and mouse would be completely beyond their grasp, because they've never seen anything remotely like it before. However, someone that saw a PC a couple years ago for the first time, being used, and then sees another one a couple yeras down the rroad might see one and think, "oh, that's a computer, you can type on it. it's like a fancy typewriter."
As far as X coming up on boot, every modern distro has an X based login manager of some kind, so it can be just as 'intuitive' as any other OS.
get the "screen up" when she turns the computer on? What the hell are you talking about?
If she wants to get the "screen up" when she "turns the computer on" I'll tell her to turn the bloody monitor on or to clarify wtf she's talking about.
So what, IBM said linux wasn't ready for the desktop - last year. That was a year ago! Linux has made quite a few strides on the desktop since then - and MS has dug themselves even deeper into their grave since then, as well. The time is now for linux on the desktop, if there is to be a time. There needs to be positive motion or someone else (Apple) will step in to try and take that market.
A $40,000 server from Dell is not just a desktop PC. Everything in it is redundant: 2, 4, 6 ways, depending. If something dies, the other component takes over.
I have a gut feeling on this matter.
I strongly suspect that, due to all the problems that Windows has had in the past, and the bad taste that it tends to develop in the mouths of those that work with technology, that the release of Longhorn will not be a "Windows" release. It will be a new OS branding entirely; it won't work with legacy windows applications. It's completely new! And that means it's that much better, since it took us 5+ years to develop it!
You've forgotten a certain principle of basic human resources (either that, or you never knew it). Individuals become less efficient as individual workers when working in groups, on a vector scale. For instance, 5 people might be 95% efficient, but if you hop that number up to 50, then the efficiency drops to 60% efficiency.
Now, they might do better if they had smaller groups, and more of them, working on specific aspects, I don't know. Maybe this is one reason why open source works well - you've got a lot of single programmers making contributions, as individuals, not as a member of a group, accountable only to themselves and the project lead.
Well, I suspect it's somewhat after the time that humans can figure out how to communicate with it, and likely shortly before they figure out that they don't want to anyway.
Why the hell duplicate efforts, when there are more than enough maps already available? Has anyone heard of the Highway Department? Each state tends to have one. How about AAA? These people all have highly detailed maps of states, etc. It would be -significantly- cheaper to pay for the maps that are already available (and are likely more accurate since, well, they're designed by people that are trained to make maps), and the data would be better.
Fact, you say? I saw not a smidgeon of fact, but merely misinformation. As I said earlier, most mac users I've known are clueless and base all their arguements on hearsay. You're a good example.
Hard drives don't seem to last like they used to, but that's not specific to PCs really, since Macs use the same drives (not IDE, btw, but ATA100, SATA and other modern ATA based busess).
Sure, drives don't last as long as they used to. However, until recently, all drives - yes, "ATA based busess" - have been IDE (or SCSI, but we're not talking about that). ATA100 is indeed an IDE drive, believe it or not.
Your blatant ignorance of the things you've just read is astounding. Did you not see me state that the 2k$ dollar system I menioned would be something I could build for myself? I don't give a rat's ass about alienware or any other rubbish. I can, and have, built a fairly top of the line PC for 500$. Not "the fastest components possible for everything" but damned near enough for me. THe 1k$ system I spec'd out a couple days ago for you to read about - well, having just read on apple's store the specs for their dual G5 tower, and having seen benchmarks for that very system, I can reasonably say that the system I spec'd out can perform quite well in standing against that dual G5 - for a 3rd of the price.
BTW, if your hardware is going bad that quickly, you need to figure out what you're doing wrong. Never have I even heard of hardware going bad that quickly - unless you're mishandling it or buying shit and not knowing it. I'd suspect both of those things, after having had this one-sided discussion with you.
I've not paid much attention to "name brand" PC systems, ever. My first system was homemade. It makes no sense to me, when the price differential is a matter of magnitude of 2, and the quality is significantly less (due to cutting corners). Component manufacturers have to compete on value, because their desired market takes into account things such as quality, generally.
I've been wanting a laptop for quite a while. The iBook and powerbook appeal to me, to a degree; however, there's just something about the trendyness of apple products I hate - mainly personified by the attitudes of the users. "Apples are so much better than PCs", "PCs are slower than macs" (even when they're not), and just assinine comments like, "I bet that laptop doesn't have bluetooth".
I recently ran into such a situation. I was in class, and I started asking an (obviosuly) proud ibook owner about his new toy, asking him if I could possibly look at it and touch it, since I'd not yet really seen them before. I mentioned that I think I might be getting a Fujitsu lifebook P2xxx (which is currently no longer sold, in favor of the P5000) instead, and he got all defensive, like I'd offended him personally. I guess that's the kind of response one gives when they've made a large (to them) technology purpose: you know the world I speak of, where computers are something for work, and disposable income is for luxury vehicles, new furniture, and fancy status symbols. At any rate, he started to grill me about the statistics of the laptop. No, it didn't have bluetooth. No, it only has 10.5" diagnal display (or something like that). But it was about an inch smaller on one demension, and half an inch smaller on another (he had an iBook 15" iirc). The fact that the laptop I mentioned was a "PC" (transmeta processor), and could get 10 hours of use from a single battery really pissed him off, though.
So basically, I won't buy a new mac simply on philosophy. Apple users don't know what they're talking about, mostly, and largely base their arguements on conjecture and hearsay. They're like illiterate religious types trying to convert scientists, to a degree. Sure, there might be some truth in what they have to say, but their unintelligent approach drives the "scientists" away. I have yet to meet a diehard mac user that wasn't either severely deficient of a likeable personality, or simply didn't have a single logical thought in their head. Worse than even your average PC geek.
This was a conversation about the relative price of compareable PCs and Macs, or the contrast of such things. It was not about the useability of mice - why bring it up? I was joking. THe fact of the matter is, I can get a real mouse from the get-go, mac users have to pay extra (are these nice little markups helping your comprehension?) for such a benefit. Thus, it's irrelivant to this topic.
You're rediculous and obviously ignorant. You call Dell and Compaq 'reputable' sources, while "Joe's Fly By Night" is not. I've heard of many, many more problems resulting from people buying a Dell than resulting from a "home brew" system made by the little guy for a friend, or a customer. Almost invariably, they're better, last longer, experience lest software and hardware problems, and other such factors - while costing less. Why is this, you might ask? It's because the small guy can't afford defects - he needs every bit of repeat customer he can get. Dell does not, to the large degree. They have marketing. Same goes for Apple.
As far as a "lot of effort" bit, you're wrong. Very little 'effort' is required. "Less performance" is just hogwash. It's fairly obvious to me that you're doing something horribly wrong. $2000 should be able to buy you the absolute best system imagineable on the market, from parts, or two top-end complete systems. You're either lieing from your rancid ass, or you're as confused as a blonde in a sex shop.
I think that you've inadvertantly proven an earlier post - that mac users are dumb, and that's why they use macs. That might not go for all mac users, but it certainly goes for you. You can't even properly research the price of a system, FFS.
FYI, I use "all platforms" as well. You aren't fooling anyone. Macs are prohibitively more expensive.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm so relieved. I think about this daily. It's much more of a concern to me than going bald prematurely, being impotent, or being intellectually feeble.
Apparently you've not played many RPGs. I've been out wandering in the woods for days...
There's a good reason for that. 10 years ago, there -wasn't- any comercially available digital cameras, high-resolution scanners, or photo quality color printers. What little there was was well over the head of all but the richest folks. It was all industrial and damned expensive. Your logic is flawed.
apparently it hasn't occured to you that slashdot.org is essentially a personal web page of rob malda and gang.
the point that's being made is, people with interests should publish them in an open fashion so that people with similar interests would congregate. Improve the internet culture.
If you're doing something cool (building a robot, maybe), put up some information on it. we might want to see it, and google will find it for us. My impression is that it applies more accurately to geeks than to anyone else... I mean, we're the ones that can pretty much effortlessly make the things, afterall.
Depends on where in the country|world you are.
I know that out here in the Midwest US, it's pronounced, "r-oot-er". I'm apt to pronounce it "r-ow-ter" because I'm silly, I guess - though I try and pronounce it 'r-oot-er' so I don't get any confused looks. If I recall correctly, "r-ow-ter" is how it's pronounced on some parts of the East Coast. I don't know where else I'd pick it up (being as that's where I grew up).
It's like the difference between "route 66" and "route 66". Different dialects pronounce it differently. "garage" and "garage", etc.
+1 Insightful, someone. Spot on. This is exactly what SCO has been getting investments for.
If the command line types don't have a place in the future linux desktop scene, then who will make the future linux desktop? Your average end user?
That tactic is true, but I can see it backfiring on them in two possible ways.
:P
One, RMS claims (and proves) that he was falsely named, and that there might be some sort of karma dock in the judges' minds (or judge's mind) of SCO's intent, efficiency, and even their basic competency. Possibly he'd claim that he has nothing to do with a Linux operating system. He has dabbled with some userland and libraries for GNU/Linux based operating systems, though.
Two, that RMS might actually get into court on this case, and is able to restrain himself. This would, IMO, be hillarious. He knows the law well, as he's demonstrated, and what's more, he seems to be able to play quite well at the 'lawyer word definition/twisting game'. I think he might be able to act in a civil manner in a court of law, too; we're not talking about some convention or debate, here. We're talking about a court of law. As vigilant as Stallman is about GNU/Linux advocacy from a law perspective, you'd think he'd have the diligency to represent GNU/Linux to the fullest extent possible.
I've got a custom knoppix CD image. It's fairly minimal, with only mozilla, KDE, konq, and OOo. Then I simply have a little script that will mount an NFS share and then dd an image to hda1. easy as pie.
:) of course, they're not likely to do any work at this time (or any other time, really), so hopefully they don't have any actual paperwork to be doing. :)
You could alternatively do it with something non-visual, but if it's a user's workstation, I like to be able to give them a little flavor of linux while their workstation heals itself.
Whether it was intended as an attack on open source or not, does not matter. THe end result is that many people even on ye ol' mighty and literate slashdot have taken it as saying such, and countless other literate people will as well.
*cough*
hopefully one of the first three people to view the site thought to mirror the content for the rest of us here...
Well, technically speaking, nothing is intuitive. Humans learn things based off of relevance to things they already know. So intuitiveness of something is relative to one's life experiences. For instance, a jungle dweller would probably think a computer is magical, and worship it. The thought of inputing things with a keyboard and mouse would be completely beyond their grasp, because they've never seen anything remotely like it before. However, someone that saw a PC a couple years ago for the first time, being used, and then sees another one a couple yeras down the rroad might see one and think, "oh, that's a computer, you can type on it. it's like a fancy typewriter."
As far as X coming up on boot, every modern distro has an X based login manager of some kind, so it can be just as 'intuitive' as any other OS.
get the "screen up" when she turns the computer on? What the hell are you talking about?
If she wants to get the "screen up" when she "turns the computer on" I'll tell her to turn the bloody monitor on or to clarify wtf she's talking about.
So what, IBM said linux wasn't ready for the desktop - last year. That was a year ago! Linux has made quite a few strides on the desktop since then - and MS has dug themselves even deeper into their grave since then, as well. The time is now for linux on the desktop, if there is to be a time. There needs to be positive motion or someone else (Apple) will step in to try and take that market.
Fool, you know nothing.
A $40,000 server from Dell is not just a desktop PC. Everything in it is redundant: 2, 4, 6 ways, depending. If something dies, the other component takes over.
sweet :P
You've forgotten a certain principle of basic human resources (either that, or you never knew it). Individuals become less efficient as individual workers when working in groups, on a vector scale. For instance, 5 people might be 95% efficient, but if you hop that number up to 50, then the efficiency drops to 60% efficiency.
Now, they might do better if they had smaller groups, and more of them, working on specific aspects, I don't know. Maybe this is one reason why open source works well - you've got a lot of single programmers making contributions, as individuals, not as a member of a group, accountable only to themselves and the project lead.
Mark Twain said that. It was more like, "I have no respect for a man that can not afford to spell a word more than one way."
This whole goddamn topic should be -1 Redundant. There's not a single breath of fresh air on the entire page.
Well, I suspect it's somewhat after the time that humans can figure out how to communicate with it, and likely shortly before they figure out that they don't want to anyway.
Why the hell duplicate efforts, when there are more than enough maps already available? Has anyone heard of the Highway Department? Each state tends to have one. How about AAA? These people all have highly detailed maps of states, etc. It would be -significantly- cheaper to pay for the maps that are already available (and are likely more accurate since, well, they're designed by people that are trained to make maps), and the data would be better.
Fact, you say? I saw not a smidgeon of fact, but merely misinformation. As I said earlier, most mac users I've known are clueless and base all their arguements on hearsay. You're a good example.
Hard drives don't seem to last like they used to, but that's not specific to PCs really, since Macs use the same drives (not IDE, btw, but ATA100, SATA and other modern ATA based busess).
Sure, drives don't last as long as they used to. However, until recently, all drives - yes, "ATA based busess" - have been IDE (or SCSI, but we're not talking about that). ATA100 is indeed an IDE drive, believe it or not.
Your blatant ignorance of the things you've just read is astounding. Did you not see me state that the 2k$ dollar system I menioned would be something I could build for myself? I don't give a rat's ass about alienware or any other rubbish. I can, and have, built a fairly top of the line PC for 500$. Not "the fastest components possible for everything" but damned near enough for me. THe 1k$ system I spec'd out a couple days ago for you to read about - well, having just read on apple's store the specs for their dual G5 tower, and having seen benchmarks for that very system, I can reasonably say that the system I spec'd out can perform quite well in standing against that dual G5 - for a 3rd of the price.
BTW, if your hardware is going bad that quickly, you need to figure out what you're doing wrong. Never have I even heard of hardware going bad that quickly - unless you're mishandling it or buying shit and not knowing it. I'd suspect both of those things, after having had this one-sided discussion with you.
I've not paid much attention to "name brand" PC systems, ever. My first system was homemade. It makes no sense to me, when the price differential is a matter of magnitude of 2, and the quality is significantly less (due to cutting corners). Component manufacturers have to compete on value, because their desired market takes into account things such as quality, generally.
I've been wanting a laptop for quite a while. The iBook and powerbook appeal to me, to a degree; however, there's just something about the trendyness of apple products I hate - mainly personified by the attitudes of the users. "Apples are so much better than PCs", "PCs are slower than macs" (even when they're not), and just assinine comments like, "I bet that laptop doesn't have bluetooth".
I recently ran into such a situation. I was in class, and I started asking an (obviosuly) proud ibook owner about his new toy, asking him if I could possibly look at it and touch it, since I'd not yet really seen them before. I mentioned that I think I might be getting a Fujitsu lifebook P2xxx (which is currently no longer sold, in favor of the P5000) instead, and he got all defensive, like I'd offended him personally. I guess that's the kind of response one gives when they've made a large (to them) technology purpose: you know the world I speak of, where computers are something for work, and disposable income is for luxury vehicles, new furniture, and fancy status symbols. At any rate, he started to grill me about the statistics of the laptop. No, it didn't have bluetooth. No, it only has 10.5" diagnal display (or something like that). But it was about an inch smaller on one demension, and half an inch smaller on another (he had an iBook 15" iirc). The fact that the laptop I mentioned was a "PC" (transmeta processor), and could get 10 hours of use from a single battery really pissed him off, though.
So basically, I won't buy a new mac simply on philosophy. Apple users don't know what they're talking about, mostly, and largely base their arguements on conjecture and hearsay. They're like illiterate religious types trying to convert scientists, to a degree. Sure, there might be some truth in what they have to say, but their unintelligent approach drives the "scientists" away. I have yet to meet a diehard mac user that wasn't either severely deficient of a likeable personality, or simply didn't have a single logical thought in their head. Worse than even your average PC geek.
God, dear God, why are you so clueless?!
This was a conversation about the relative price of compareable PCs and Macs, or the contrast of such things. It was not about the useability of mice - why bring it up? I was joking. THe fact of the matter is, I can get a real mouse from the get-go, mac users have to pay extra (are these nice little markups helping your comprehension?) for such a benefit. Thus, it's irrelivant to this topic.
You're rediculous and obviously ignorant. You call Dell and Compaq 'reputable' sources, while "Joe's Fly By Night" is not. I've heard of many, many more problems resulting from people buying a Dell than resulting from a "home brew" system made by the little guy for a friend, or a customer. Almost invariably, they're better, last longer, experience lest software and hardware problems, and other such factors - while costing less. Why is this, you might ask? It's because the small guy can't afford defects - he needs every bit of repeat customer he can get. Dell does not, to the large degree. They have marketing. Same goes for Apple.
As far as a "lot of effort" bit, you're wrong. Very little 'effort' is required. "Less performance" is just hogwash. It's fairly obvious to me that you're doing something horribly wrong. $2000 should be able to buy you the absolute best system imagineable on the market, from parts, or two top-end complete systems. You're either lieing from your rancid ass, or you're as confused as a blonde in a sex shop.
I think that you've inadvertantly proven an earlier post - that mac users are dumb, and that's why they use macs. That might not go for all mac users, but it certainly goes for you. You can't even properly research the price of a system, FFS.
FYI, I use "all platforms" as well. You aren't fooling anyone. Macs are prohibitively more expensive.