AMEN! I use Mandrake (8.0) myself (not for browsing the web and email because I need an external modem first) but it's a bit security lax and to get rid of all the crap it installs by default, I had to go through the whole list by hand rather than flicking through the tree view.
I can also remember wanting to uninstall some package (one dependant on GNOME, I think). It tried to uninstall a bunch of packages that I knew other packages were dependant on. I was shocked! That one incident almost convinced me to uninstall Mandrake completely and get another distro or move over to *BSD.
Hint to the Mandrake guys: keep the intallation slim and fix your package management system PLEASE!!! Do, and I'll love your distro again, just like I did after I installed it first.
For the average person, unless FreeBSD was far more inefficient than Linux or visa versa, they wouldn't care. To be honest I don't. Both OSs are, in my mind, just as good as one another. They both have their good points and their bad points. I use Linux myself but I'd have no problem using FreeBSD or NetBSD or OpenBSD. The only thing I dislike about the *BSDs is that they forked.
Yeah, but that only means that KDE is built on Trolltech's work as opposed to being owned by Trolltech. If you compile a program using somebody else's libraries, that doesn't mean that they own copyright on it.
I like Herman Hauser and everything that Acorn produced in their time. It's a pity they got liquidated. Bastard Boland!
Anyway... Acorn's greatest mistake was not allowing the BBC Model B, etc. even to be licence for production by 3rd parties. Hauser admits as much as this. If they did, the world might all be using a far more powerful OS right now and not Windows.
Whilst I can appreciate the conflict of ideology that caused it to develop, what I don't like is that if focused on the wrong thing. It lead to the development of a new desktop rather than creating an alternative to what was causing the ideological difficulty: the toolkit.
Had the GNOME project simply worked on a free alternative to Qt, things would be fine but instead we saw a wasteful (IMO) fork with the development of a needlessly redundant and incompatible (with the existing solution - KDE) infrastructural package.
You're right, it's not relevant - Black Acid focused on the wrong thing (Nonfree packages not porting well to another architecture is a strawman argument anyway).
If it was a simple matter of RMS wanting Free software to be listed seperately from Nonfree software, I wouldn't mind as much. However, he seems to want to block Nonfree software full-stop.
Does he not realise that this goes against the whole `freedom' thing?
What the USSR practiced was a system called State Capitalism. In state capitalism, control of enterprised is centralised and is controlled and owned by the state. In Communism, everything might be owned by the state as a whole but control is held by the workers. There's quite a difference.
The USSR's system is closer to that practiced in the USA and further from true Communism than most people will admit.
No. I included both of those because they were people who weren't afraid to think for themselves and challenge conventional thought just like all the others I listed.
It doesn't matter who I like or who they like -- it's what they did with their lives that matters. I could have listed many other people, they were just the ones that came to mind at that moment, probably because I'm currently re-reading `The Antichrist'.
Of course, then there's the Antinihilists - Nietzscheans in the true sense, not in that of Andromeda - like myself who feel that, like the Nihilists, that nobody in and of themselves is special. We have various special abilities as individuals that mark us out, but in and of themselves, those abilities don't make us special. There's always somebody with more ability than you. Everybody has the same potential, both for success and for failure.
Those who mark themselves out are those who, realising their insignificance, push themselves above the rabble with no intention or compulsion of exploiting their potential.
A thing is not in and of itself special, it makes itself special. The different is slight, but important.
I'm thinking of people like Socrates, Epicurus, Seneca, Montaigne, Goethe and Nietzsche who were like this.
If only there were more geekesses. Interesting, witty, intelligent women who can hold an intelligent conversation and not be frightened off when they find out I'm a geek.
Slashdot Mirror
To be honest, I'd love to install both on my machine! They're both great.
AMEN! I use Mandrake (8.0) myself (not for browsing the web and email because I need an external modem first) but it's a bit security lax and to get rid of all the crap it installs by default, I had to go through the whole list by hand rather than flicking through the tree view.
I can also remember wanting to uninstall some package (one dependant on GNOME, I think). It tried to uninstall a bunch of packages that I knew other packages were dependant on. I was shocked! That one incident almost convinced me to uninstall Mandrake completely and get another distro or move over to *BSD.
Hint to the Mandrake guys: keep the intallation slim and fix your package management system PLEASE!!! Do, and I'll love your distro again, just like I did after I installed it first.
Well, it is sort of since Linux is more like SYS V than BSD.
For the average person, unless FreeBSD was far more inefficient than Linux or visa versa, they wouldn't care. To be honest I don't. Both OSs are, in my mind, just as good as one another. They both have their good points and their bad points. I use Linux myself but I'd have no problem using FreeBSD or NetBSD or OpenBSD. The only thing I dislike about the *BSDs is that they forked.
Ah well...
You hated BBC BASIC?!?! But it's the best BASIC dialect *ever*! Seriously!
...
At least it's nowhere near as bad as MS BASIC and its variations...
I don't think that WinCE quite qualifies as Open Source, if you know what I mean...
Yeah, but that only means that KDE is built on Trolltech's work as opposed to being owned by Trolltech. If you compile a program using somebody else's libraries, that doesn't mean that they own copyright on it.
Tuché!
I like Herman Hauser and everything that Acorn produced in their time. It's a pity they got liquidated. Bastard Boland!
Anyway... Acorn's greatest mistake was not allowing the BBC Model B, etc. even to be licence for production by 3rd parties. Hauser admits as much as this. If they did, the world might all be using a far more powerful OS right now and not Windows.
Part of being a good politician is having the right people around you. If some one of his staffers did suggest this then so be it, he hired well.
Which becomes GNU/GNU/GNU/GNU which becomes GNU/GNU/GNU/GNU/GNU/GNU/GNU/GNU which becomes... oh shit, we're all doomed!
Trolltech don't own KDE! Still, your point's fully valid.
GNOME stands for [G]NU [N]etwork [O]bject [M]odel [E]nvironment. Tsk!
Nowt wrong with socialism - it's just that it's never been implemented :-)
On GNOME, I'll say one thing:
Whilst I can appreciate the conflict of ideology that caused it to develop, what I don't like is that if focused on the wrong thing. It lead to the development of a new desktop rather than creating an alternative to what was causing the ideological difficulty: the toolkit.
Had the GNOME project simply worked on a free alternative to Qt, things would be fine but instead we saw a wasteful (IMO) fork with the development of a needlessly redundant and incompatible (with the existing solution - KDE) infrastructural package.
You're right, it's not relevant - Black Acid focused on the wrong thing (Nonfree packages not porting well to another architecture is a strawman argument anyway).
If it was a simple matter of RMS wanting Free software to be listed seperately from Nonfree software, I wouldn't mind as much. However, he seems to want to block Nonfree software full-stop.
Does he not realise that this goes against the whole `freedom' thing?
Seriously, it wasn't!
What the USSR practiced was a system called State Capitalism. In state capitalism, control of enterprised is centralised and is controlled and owned by the state. In Communism, everything might be owned by the state as a whole but control is held by the workers. There's quite a difference.
The USSR's system is closer to that practiced in the USA and further from true Communism than most people will admit.
Very funny. If you were going to pretend to be Wil, you should have at least created a fake account that made it *look* as if you were Wil.
Hell, I'd be willing to pay to have him shot too.
Funny posts -2? You said half the time they aren't funny (yes subjective..) yet more than 3/4 of the time they are funny.
1/2 + 3/4 = 1? Um, no! That doesn't quite add up there.
No. I included both of those because they were people who weren't afraid to think for themselves and challenge conventional thought just like all the others I listed.
It doesn't matter who I like or who they like -- it's what they did with their lives that matters. I could have listed many other people, they were just the ones that came to mind at that moment, probably because I'm currently re-reading `The Antichrist'.
Of course, then there's the Antinihilists - Nietzscheans in the true sense, not in that of Andromeda - like myself who feel that, like the Nihilists, that nobody in and of themselves is special. We have various special abilities as individuals that mark us out, but in and of themselves, those abilities don't make us special. There's always somebody with more ability than you. Everybody has the same potential, both for success and for failure.
Those who mark themselves out are those who, realising their insignificance, push themselves above the rabble with no intention or compulsion of exploiting their potential.
A thing is not in and of itself special, it makes itself special. The different is slight, but important.
I'm thinking of people like Socrates, Epicurus, Seneca, Montaigne, Goethe and Nietzsche who were like this.
Oh well...
If only there were more geekesses. Interesting, witty, intelligent women who can hold an intelligent conversation and not be frightened off when they find out I'm a geek.
Oh well, I live in hope...
A *pre-emptible*kernel* is something Linux hasn't always been. In fact, without applying either Morten's or Love's patches, it still isn't.
Hence the reason why XMM (amonst other reasons) skips occasionally and loading Mozilla hangs the machine temporarily.