With Linux, often the assumption is made that you are running a similar configuration as the developer, and critical libraries may be missing and the response is just "well, you should have that already".
No.
All packages that are built from source automatically detect your libraries and will build whatever works with them -- as long as you install development packages if you use anything built from source. If libraries are missing, you just install them.
All packages that are provided for Debian or Ubuntu already refer to all dependencies, so unless you go out of your way to install them "the Windows way" (download package in a browser, use dpkg from command line to install it, instead of using a repository), everything happens automatically.
All packages that have their own installers, carry libraries with themselves (this is what all Windows installers do).
The only things that don't fit into those categories that I have seen recently are truly ancient applications that are a massive pain in the neck to install on any OS, Unix equivalents of DOS applications. Last example of this that I have seen was Xilinx FPGA Editor -- it insisted on Motif and portmap, did not recognize screen number, and was not packaged for Ubuntu, so I had to configure such an environment for it manually.
Well, I don't, and now I have to scour the web to find the missing libraries - which also aren't in the repositories - in order to install an app.
If they are binary Debian/Ubuntu packages, that's because libraries are in the maintainer's repository along with them. You NEVER "scour the web" for Linux libraries' binaries. The only way to produce a valid Debian package that depends on a library is to have another package with that library and refer to it -- so consistency is maintained.
If they are only available as source tarballs (what by now only applies to bleeding-edge development stuff), you see all their names in the output of./configure, look up the repository, and only if they are not there you may have to look for them elsewhere -- usually in a README file that you forgot to read in the first place.
The difference between Linux and Windows is, in Linux if you want to do anything outside of what Debian, or Ubuntu, or Fedora
Or it's in Ubuntu Launchpad PPA for that package, where you can get pretty much everything that ever was released as open source and is somewhat maintained by someone. Or in a private repository.
think you should need to do you have to hack it. Hacks and workarounds are the norm in Linux, and don't tell me it's not because I've used it off and on for the last 15 years.
If installing from manufacturer/developer's package is a "hack", then all Windows applications require hacks to be installed as well.
Not PERSONAL credit. Their corporations borrow the money, so irresponsibility on their part never affects them personally -- even if all their companies just went Chapter 7.
Systems with "orders of magnitude more reliability than Linux" are only reliable in the simplest configurations, and Linux is only less reliable in humongous desktop-oriented setup that you seem to be only familiar with.
With hardware drivers, networking and application software at comparable level, Linux provides higher reliability and includes infrastructure where other embedded-oriented systems have none.
I work for a company that uses Linux in embedded systems -- if Microsoft gave away anything with their stinking Win32 layer anywhere, or anything that only supports FAT and NTFS filesystems, or anything with their driver model, or their desktop-oriented scheduler, we would still not touch it with a ten foot pole.
Please define where is the border between "desktop label printer" and "industrial strength". Are Dymo printers "desktop"? Are CNC mills "industrial strength"? What kind of labels are those anyway? Would it be easier to order the labels in bulk from someone else, providing eps templates and receiving rolls of pre-printed numbered labels?
I can confirm that img.4chan.org and www.4chan.org are unreachable from my home DSL (AT&T/Yahoo in Northern California). Everything works fine once I have routed 207.126.64.0/24 through OpenVPN over a non-AT&T network.
If Microsoft's goal was to make money they would run a Ponzi scheme or take over a dozen of third-world countries. Both were proven to be far more successful and less risky than what they are doing.
In reality Microsoft grew out of Bill Gates' desperate need to prove to the world that he is not a spoiled retard. This is why Microsoft's strategies invariably focus on destruction of everything that is run by smarter people and sinking money from few "successful" products into countless projects of taking over various unrelated parts of the market. This is why Microsoft is now run by chair-throwing sociopath Steve Ballmer. This is why Gates sunk his money into "charitable" foundation, so he can control medical research and development of poor countries. They are bitter, retarded control freaks that will not stop until every thought of every human is shaped by their stupid "vision".
They will do fine in entry level positions but as soon as they get into management,
Why on Earth a software developer or sysadmin will want to "get into management"? Even if he would have to, aren't there supposed to be VERY FEW managers compared to everyone else?
they will corrupt the organization.
How? By not quoting Microsoft press release on meetings?
Specifically it's a solution to a problem that no one but Microsoft has. If Microsoft wanted to make a video player, they would simply bundle better codecs with their stupid Media Player. If Microsoft wanted to make an interactive HTTP-based platform, they would bundle HTML5-supporting browser.
However since the death of IE and Microsoft Office exclusivity their real problem is lack of lock-up into Microsoft-only software, they produced an incompatible monstrosity with no technical merit whatsoever.
You do know MS has the money to pay people far, far smarter than you (or 99.5% of Open Source developers), right?
No, I don't even know what people are "smarter than me or 99.5%" of anything.
I do however know what precisely Microsoft does with people whom they consider "smart" -- pays them to work for "Microsoft Research" producing nothing at all, so they won't work for someone else.
Everything Microsoft produces follows their traditional model -- bring a lot of people who know nothing about software development, and let them tinker with bad code to produce more and worse code.
Does that mean that a legitimate business should never send unsolicited letters and flyers in the post, and should never cold-call? These are core tools of the marketing world.
Yes. Oh, and screw TV and magazine ads, too, media should learn to live on subscription fees and subsidies. If those things were banned, all companies would have to rely on people who are actively looking for products and services they provide -- through search engines, phone directories, etc.
Google provides pretty much the only advertisement model (ironically, Internet-based one) that does not constantly assault the recipients with things they DO NOT WANT.
Slashdot Mirror
With Linux, often the assumption is made that you are running a similar configuration as the developer, and critical libraries may be missing and the response is just "well, you should have that already".
No.
All packages that are built from source automatically detect your libraries and will build whatever works with them -- as long as you install development packages if you use anything built from source. If libraries are missing, you just install them.
All packages that are provided for Debian or Ubuntu already refer to all dependencies, so unless you go out of your way to install them "the Windows way" (download package in a browser, use dpkg from command line to install it, instead of using a repository), everything happens automatically.
All packages that have their own installers, carry libraries with themselves (this is what all Windows installers do).
The only things that don't fit into those categories that I have seen recently are truly ancient applications that are a massive pain in the neck to install on any OS, Unix equivalents of DOS applications. Last example of this that I have seen was Xilinx FPGA Editor -- it insisted on Motif and portmap, did not recognize screen number, and was not packaged for Ubuntu, so I had to configure such an environment for it manually.
Well, I don't, and now I have to scour the web to find the missing libraries - which also aren't in the repositories - in order to install an app.
If they are binary Debian/Ubuntu packages, that's because libraries are in the maintainer's repository along with them. You NEVER "scour the web" for Linux libraries' binaries. The only way to produce a valid Debian package that depends on a library is to have another package with that library and refer to it -- so consistency is maintained.
If they are only available as source tarballs (what by now only applies to bleeding-edge development stuff), you see all their names in the output of ./configure, look up the repository, and only if they are not there you may have to look for them elsewhere -- usually in a README file that you forgot to read in the first place.
The difference between Linux and Windows is, in Linux if you want to do anything outside of what Debian, or Ubuntu, or Fedora
Or it's in Ubuntu Launchpad PPA for that package, where you can get pretty much everything that ever was released as open source and is somewhat maintained by someone. Or in a private repository.
think you should need to do you have to hack it. Hacks and workarounds are the norm in Linux, and don't tell me it's not because I've used it off and on for the last 15 years.
If installing from manufacturer/developer's package is a "hack", then all Windows applications require hacks to be installed as well.
Because they should back to /b/.
Yeah, stupid people gamble. Smart people invest.
And the result is exactly the same.
Not PERSONAL credit. Their corporations borrow the money, so irresponsibility on their part never affects them personally -- even if all their companies just went Chapter 7.
You must eat it.
(If, by any chance, this format is not DRM'ed and patented to Hell and back, count me impressed).
Systems with "orders of magnitude more reliability than Linux" are only reliable in the simplest configurations, and Linux is only less reliable in humongous desktop-oriented setup that you seem to be only familiar with.
With hardware drivers, networking and application software at comparable level, Linux provides higher reliability and includes infrastructure where other embedded-oriented systems have none.
Wrong.
I work for a company that uses Linux in embedded systems -- if Microsoft gave away anything with their stinking Win32 layer anywhere, or anything that only supports FAT and NTFS filesystems, or anything with their driver model, or their desktop-oriented scheduler, we would still not touch it with a ten foot pole.
Even if the poster spent all his life in his mom's basement posting to /b/, he would achieve more than Siebel.
Because Siebel is an epitome of "let's write a lot of code for insipid, unusable applications for overhyped purpose".
rabid prohibition group, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, or NAMBLA
what
i'm a stick!!! i'm a STIIIICK!
suck my diiiiick!! I'M A STIIICK!!
I can still remember Anderson Consultants, but for the life of me I can't remember what they call themselves now.
It's now "Ass-Enter".
Weren't they supposed to develop a gun for blind shooters first?
Please define where is the border between "desktop label printer" and "industrial strength". Are Dymo printers "desktop"? Are CNC mills "industrial strength"? What kind of labels are those anyway? Would it be easier to order the labels in bulk from someone else, providing eps templates and receiving rolls of pre-printed numbered labels?
Access is now restored -- I can see 4chan without VPN.
I can confirm that img.4chan.org and www.4chan.org are unreachable from my home DSL (AT&T/Yahoo in Northern California). Everything works fine once I have routed 207.126.64.0/24 through OpenVPN over a non-AT&T network.
If Microsoft's goal was to make money they would run a Ponzi scheme or take over a dozen of third-world countries. Both were proven to be far more successful and less risky than what they are doing.
In reality Microsoft grew out of Bill Gates' desperate need to prove to the world that he is not a spoiled retard. This is why Microsoft's strategies invariably focus on destruction of everything that is run by smarter people and sinking money from few "successful" products into countless projects of taking over various unrelated parts of the market. This is why Microsoft is now run by chair-throwing sociopath Steve Ballmer. This is why Gates sunk his money into "charitable" foundation, so he can control medical research and development of poor countries. They are bitter, retarded control freaks that will not stop until every thought of every human is shaped by their stupid "vision".
They will do fine in entry level positions but as soon as they get into management,
Why on Earth a software developer or sysadmin will want to "get into management"? Even if he would have to, aren't there supposed to be VERY FEW managers compared to everyone else?
they will corrupt the organization.
How? By not quoting Microsoft press release on meetings?
On the other hand, if EVERYONE is a terrorist...
I think, I have discovered a way to demonstrate why Laffer curve is misleading. It may be more relevant to the current problems in US, too.
/b/ can have it.
Invasion of /b/tards every Caturday?
Oh, I forgot, I am on Slashdot, we have them all week.
Specifically it's a solution to a problem that no one but Microsoft has. If Microsoft wanted to make a video player, they would simply bundle better codecs with their stupid Media Player. If Microsoft wanted to make an interactive HTTP-based platform, they would bundle HTML5-supporting browser.
However since the death of IE and Microsoft Office exclusivity their real problem is lack of lock-up into Microsoft-only software, they produced an incompatible monstrosity with no technical merit whatsoever.
You do know MS has the money to pay people far, far smarter than you (or 99.5% of Open Source developers), right?
No, I don't even know what people are "smarter than me or 99.5%" of anything.
I do however know what precisely Microsoft does with people whom they consider "smart" -- pays them to work for "Microsoft Research" producing nothing at all, so they won't work for someone else.
Everything Microsoft produces follows their traditional model -- bring a lot of people who know nothing about software development, and let them tinker with bad code to produce more and worse code.
what do you mean by subsidies?
BBC and its likes. Whatever you call this model, it supports (relatively) high-quality media better than advertisement does.
I thought, Fox has a surplus of videos portraying stupid people.
Does that mean that a legitimate business should never send unsolicited letters and flyers in the post, and should never cold-call? These are core tools of the marketing world.
Yes. Oh, and screw TV and magazine ads, too, media should learn to live on subscription fees and subsidies. If those things were banned, all companies would have to rely on people who are actively looking for products and services they provide -- through search engines, phone directories, etc.
Google provides pretty much the only advertisement model (ironically, Internet-based one) that does not constantly assault the recipients with things they DO NOT WANT.