Yes, I see your point. But I've already accepted that many programs I rely on for my work (Firefox, LibreOffice, Thunderbird, KeePassX) need to be extensively configured, so I'd be inconsistent if I damned GNOME for it.
It doesn't have automatic dependency resolution, but it does tell you what a package depends on and if you already have it installed, so it's just adding one additional step for the user.
The Slackware devs prefer it that way since they want to keep track of what they're installing.
Firstly, if I'm shilling for anybody it's Ubuntu. Go through my posting history, whenever somebody asks for a Linux recommendation I've always said Ubuntu MATE.
But I'm not a shill for anybody. Just a promoter of free software. I don't care what DE or init you use. Just don't spread insane lies about FOSS while you're at it.
I don't care if you like or don't like GNOME or systemd. There's things I like about them and things I don't as well. If you want to boycott them, power to you. Do whatever it takes for you to get your work done.
What I take issue with are the people who smear free software by saying that anything was "forced" on them despite the fact that alternatives exist. What's the point of using free software if you're going to crawl into a fetal position and weep yourself to sleep whenever something you don't like is the default?
Hey there buddy, I was expecting someone to trot out this old 'you can choose on Linux' argument.
Please answer the following questions:'
How many distros use Gnome or one of its mutant strains as the default DE?
I dunno, there's too many distros to count.
How many distros use systemd?
See above.
What percentage of the Linux user world gets Gnome or system forced down their throat in the default, out of box loadout?
Couldn't tell you what percentage of Linux users use a distro with GNOME or systemd as the default, see above. But as to how many of them are being forced, zero. All of them can download Slackware or CRUX or Debian or an older still-supported version of other distros if they want to.
Really, I don't understand why you're so vehement about these two particular projects. I don't see you complaining about how the Linux kernel and the GNU coreutils and vi and X.org are tyrannical defaults and they're forced on you. They're even more prevalent than GNOME and systemd are. I guess the difference is there's no herd of sheep to follow in neverending complaints for those others like GNOME and systemd have.
How many users of those distros change their DE away from Gnome or try to strip out the systemd cancer?
None of the aforementioned were forced on anybody. But actually, bringing them up shows how different the free software ecosystem is compared to Windows'. On Windows, you have to use unsupported software to avoid bad changes, like the spyware in Windows 10. If you preferred GNOME2 to Unity or GNOME3, you can use MATE; all the major distros support it. And if you don't like systemd, some distros still support the other inits, and Slackware and Gentoo still by default don't use it.
Free software is awesome because of the choice and liberty at your disposal.
I was a major GNOME hater when they transitioned to v.3 and I stuck with MATE. I just recently tried the beta for 3.22 though and honestly it's not so bad. The default configuration sucks though, you need to install a bunch of extensions and gnome-tweak-tool for it to be usable. But it looks very nice on a HiDPI screen, and I very much appreciate that the keyboard shortcuts to any GNOME app can be displayed with Ctrl+?. Also I didn't experience any crashes or bugs in my time of using it, so it seems pretty stable.
I just wish it was more lightweight like Xfce and MATE, and the defaults didn't require so much tweaking. But overall it's fairly good right now.
Even if it turns out this was some level-1 tech support at Lenovo talking out of his ass, nobody should be surprised when Microsoft tries to lock down the BIOS to prevent alternative operating systems. They've already done it for Windows Phones and Surface tablets, so why wouldn't they do it for their laptops and desktops?
Now you're just trying to cover your ass because you said something blatantly false. The telescreen was two-day, but it wasn't connected to a network of any sorts. Unless you're going to tell me that every walkie-talkie on earth is its own Internet.
The Internet existed in real life in the year AD 1984, yes. There was no internet in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell, which was written in AD 1949.
There also were those who controlled what was remembered, and those who architected language with the end goal of non-state approved concepts being impossible to express or even conceived.
You're referring to the Ministry of Truth and Newspeak, respectively. Both of which have nothing to do with a national DNS. Now, it's true that the government could make it annoying to access unapproved websites, and there's nothing wrong with being skeptical of their intentions, but to say it's Orwellian is a massive hyperbole. Governments all throughout time have engaged in censorship and repression, it takes a lot more than that to reach Stalinism.
That's funny, I re-read Nineteen Eighty-four recently and I didn't see anything about a national DNS being used to restrict Internet access from the proles and Outer Party.
In all seriousness, I don't think this is that big a deal. >99% of people already blindly trust their DNS to their ISP (generally about as untrustworthy as governments are in any case), and those that don't won't be affected by any regulations the UK wants to impose.
If I have my GPS turned off, is it still recording my location? Or is the article saying that it records your location if the GPS is on, even if you're not actively using Maps? Big difference there.
I'm not a developer so I couldn't tell you anything about that, but I have over a dozen extensions installed in Firefox Nightly and none of them have broken in the past two years.
That is utter bullshit. Early boot information comes from the _kernel_ (you may have heard of it?) Anything journald can to is _late_ boot information. Unless you are so brain-washed that you thing systemd is the kernel?
Why don't you read about how the Linux boot process works sometime? First of all, start_kernel() happens midway through, it's not the very first thing (what do you think you're booting if the kernel's already loaded into memory?). Secondly, you get more information with journald because it starts with initramfs, rather than rsyslog which starts later at runlevel 2 under sysVinit. See: https://debian-handbook.info/b...
Your post is somewhat contradictory, don't you think? First you talk about the mutually exclusive diversity of opinion, then you suggest that the Firefox team should listen to one monolithic "the end user" as if they form a collective.
You get more early boot information using journald than you get with rsyslog and syslogd.
In every case I know about, everywhere systemd will fail-to-boot but initd would not, there's some extremely dangerous setup that could easily result in data loss. The user is often not aware of this, so either they'll get frustrated and think systemd is a buggy piece of crap, or they'll immediately Google how to bypass whatever the error is and continue their danger, then blame systemd when the data loss occurs.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I see your point. But I've already accepted that many programs I rely on for my work (Firefox, LibreOffice, Thunderbird, KeePassX) need to be extensively configured, so I'd be inconsistent if I damned GNOME for it.
It doesn't have automatic dependency resolution, but it does tell you what a package depends on and if you already have it installed, so it's just adding one additional step for the user.
The Slackware devs prefer it that way since they want to keep track of what they're installing.
Slackware has a package manager: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
If only the North Korean government's IT department had such an encyclopedic knowledge about Linux DEs, what a world we'd be living in!
Slackware's the most stable Linux distro I've ever used. Why don't you deploy that for your servers?
It's KDE 3 that's mocked up to look like macOS. See: https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...
Firstly, if I'm shilling for anybody it's Ubuntu. Go through my posting history, whenever somebody asks for a Linux recommendation I've always said Ubuntu MATE.
But I'm not a shill for anybody. Just a promoter of free software. I don't care what DE or init you use. Just don't spread insane lies about FOSS while you're at it.
I don't care if you like or don't like GNOME or systemd. There's things I like about them and things I don't as well. If you want to boycott them, power to you. Do whatever it takes for you to get your work done.
What I take issue with are the people who smear free software by saying that anything was "forced" on them despite the fact that alternatives exist. What's the point of using free software if you're going to crawl into a fetal position and weep yourself to sleep whenever something you don't like is the default?
... the question on everyone's minds is, "why can't they both lose?"
Hey there buddy, I was expecting someone to trot out this old 'you can choose on Linux' argument.
Please answer the following questions:'
How many distros use Gnome or one of its mutant strains as the default DE?
I dunno, there's too many distros to count.
How many distros use systemd?
See above.
What percentage of the Linux user world gets Gnome or system forced down their throat in the default, out of box loadout?
Couldn't tell you what percentage of Linux users use a distro with GNOME or systemd as the default, see above. But as to how many of them are being forced, zero. All of them can download Slackware or CRUX or Debian or an older still-supported version of other distros if they want to.
Really, I don't understand why you're so vehement about these two particular projects. I don't see you complaining about how the Linux kernel and the GNU coreutils and vi and X.org are tyrannical defaults and they're forced on you. They're even more prevalent than GNOME and systemd are. I guess the difference is there's no herd of sheep to follow in neverending complaints for those others like GNOME and systemd have.
How many users of those distros change their DE away from Gnome or try to strip out the systemd cancer?
See the above.
None of the aforementioned were forced on anybody. But actually, bringing them up shows how different the free software ecosystem is compared to Windows'. On Windows, you have to use unsupported software to avoid bad changes, like the spyware in Windows 10. If you preferred GNOME2 to Unity or GNOME3, you can use MATE; all the major distros support it. And if you don't like systemd, some distros still support the other inits, and Slackware and Gentoo still by default don't use it.
Free software is awesome because of the choice and liberty at your disposal.
I was a major GNOME hater when they transitioned to v.3 and I stuck with MATE. I just recently tried the beta for 3.22 though and honestly it's not so bad. The default configuration sucks though, you need to install a bunch of extensions and gnome-tweak-tool for it to be usable. But it looks very nice on a HiDPI screen, and I very much appreciate that the keyboard shortcuts to any GNOME app can be displayed with Ctrl+?. Also I didn't experience any crashes or bugs in my time of using it, so it seems pretty stable.
I just wish it was more lightweight like Xfce and MATE, and the defaults didn't require so much tweaking. But overall it's fairly good right now.
Even if it turns out this was some level-1 tech support at Lenovo talking out of his ass, nobody should be surprised when Microsoft tries to lock down the BIOS to prevent alternative operating systems. They've already done it for Windows Phones and Surface tablets, so why wouldn't they do it for their laptops and desktops?
Now you're just trying to cover your ass because you said something blatantly false. The telescreen was two-day, but it wasn't connected to a network of any sorts. Unless you're going to tell me that every walkie-talkie on earth is its own Internet.
Nobody cares about the thinness of a pro laptop, they just want it to get the job done.
This might be the beginning of the end of the use of Macs in audio engineering.
There was an internet in *1984*. Pay attention.
The Internet existed in real life in the year AD 1984, yes. There was no internet in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell, which was written in AD 1949.
There also were those who controlled what was remembered, and those who architected language with the end goal of non-state approved concepts being impossible to express or even conceived.
You're referring to the Ministry of Truth and Newspeak, respectively. Both of which have nothing to do with a national DNS. Now, it's true that the government could make it annoying to access unapproved websites, and there's nothing wrong with being skeptical of their intentions, but to say it's Orwellian is a massive hyperbole. Governments all throughout time have engaged in censorship and repression, it takes a lot more than that to reach Stalinism.
Like the NSA, doing illegal mass surveillance on their own citizens?
That's funny, I re-read Nineteen Eighty-four recently and I didn't see anything about a national DNS being used to restrict Internet access from the proles and Outer Party.
In all seriousness, I don't think this is that big a deal. >99% of people already blindly trust their DNS to their ISP (generally about as untrustworthy as governments are in any case), and those that don't won't be affected by any regulations the UK wants to impose.
If I have my GPS turned off, is it still recording my location? Or is the article saying that it records your location if the GPS is on, even if you're not actively using Maps? Big difference there.
I'm not a developer so I couldn't tell you anything about that, but I have over a dozen extensions installed in Firefox Nightly and none of them have broken in the past two years.
That is utter bullshit. Early boot information comes from the _kernel_ (you may have heard of it?) Anything journald can to is _late_ boot information. Unless you are so brain-washed that you thing systemd is the kernel?
Why don't you read about how the Linux boot process works sometime? First of all, start_kernel() happens midway through, it's not the very first thing (what do you think you're booting if the kernel's already loaded into memory?). Secondly, you get more information with journald because it starts with initramfs, rather than rsyslog which starts later at runlevel 2 under sysVinit. See: https://debian-handbook.info/b...
Your post is somewhat contradictory, don't you think? First you talk about the mutually exclusive diversity of opinion, then you suggest that the Firefox team should listen to one monolithic "the end user" as if they form a collective.
The telemetry in Firefox is very easily disabled.
Rather big difference between oppressive governments and free software that you can not use by choice, is there not?
You get more early boot information using journald than you get with rsyslog and syslogd.
In every case I know about, everywhere systemd will fail-to-boot but initd would not, there's some extremely dangerous setup that could easily result in data loss. The user is often not aware of this, so either they'll get frustrated and think systemd is a buggy piece of crap, or they'll immediately Google how to bypass whatever the error is and continue their danger, then blame systemd when the data loss occurs.