So the head-developer of Linux-kernel said that he prefers KDE over GNOME. He also told his reasons for that, and he said that he disagrees with the direction of GNOME. That's basically what he said, although he used a bit more words than I did;). And what he did was not wrong. I find it rather strange that many people seem to think that GNOME should be protected from criticism, especially if it comes from some high-profile person. GNOME will manage just fine.
And, like I said, Linus is not ordering people to use KDE instead of GNOME. He apparently recommends it over GNOME, but that's it. And he wasn't "shooting his mouth", he did give valid criticism. And his sentiments are shared by many people.
I bet Alan Cox recommends GNOME over KDE. Oh the humanity!
I believe he is being self-centered by acting as if he was any other guy, rather than a famous, highly-influential person.
Why do you think that Linus should NOT criticize GNOME in a plublic mailing-list? Because he happens to be Linus Torvalds? Should the fact that he prefers KDE over GNOME be hidden because it might hurt someone's feelings (if someone's feelings get hurt because of Linus'es choice of desktop, he should get his head examined)?
While Linus is respected, he has no power over people's desktops. I can't really see any GNOME-developers dropping GNOME over this incident.
While this is commendable at the personal, face-to-face or private chat level, it causes tidal waves when done in public.
So Linus should not state his opinion on anything in public because he's Linus Torvalds? Uh, OK.... Lots of people comment on GNOME, KDE, Linux all the time. I think Linus has the right to comment as well should he choose to do so. GNOME won't die if Linus Torvalds uses KDE instead of GNOME.
Linus did a lot more than simply say "I prefer KDE over GNOME". That would be OK.
In essence, that is what he said. He also gave his rationale for his choice (becase he feels that GNOME treats the user like an idiot. And that sentiment is shared by many others, like it or not). If he simply popped in and told everyone that "I use KDE and not GNOME" and vanished, people would propably call him a troll. But he actually gave lengthy rationale as to why he thinks the way he does.
He basically said something to the effect of "you are doing a lousy thing, I'm getting out and telling everyone I know to do the same".
So he should have said "I don't like GNOME that much, but I'm not going to tell you why"? Why do you feel that GNOME should be protected from critism from Linus? Is GNOME like a house of cards that does not survive criticism? I do not think so, do you? Yes, he advices people to use KDE instead of GNOME. So what?
Linus doesn't like the direction of GNOME, and he voiced his opinion in public (as in a relevant mailing-list). Is that really a bad thing? Or are only Joe Sixpacks allowed to comment on GNOME? Why? Because GNOME can't survive critique from a high-profile person? Surely that is not the case?
This would only be acceptable if the GNOME project was a load of crap, which obviously it isn't.
To some people it is. And that criticism is valid. Many people feel that KDE is a load of crap, for various reasons.
I don't give a flying fuck what they have done in the past. I'm not buying their past products. I'm interested in their CURRENT and upcoming products, because those are the ones I might be buying.
Besides, all those "innovations" listed in the post were optional stuff. In this case, the revolutionary thing is the default method of using the console. You complained that "Each device/gimmick only supported a handful of games, and each time it just looked like Nintendo was trying to cash in". Maybe. And that was because those were optional add-ons that required specific support. This case the "gimmick" is the dominant feature of the console, so the support will be a lot more widespread, and there would not be "cashing in", since it ships with the console.
Personally, I think Linus ought to know better by now than put out a self-centered post like that. There are more users in the world than just geeks.
He had an opinion on the subject-matter, and he stated it. You are free to disagree with his opinion, but does that mean that he shouldn't voice his opinion? And I don't really see what the fuzz is about. There are quite a few people around the net who are irritated by the removal of features in Gnome. Apparently Linus is one of them. There are also lots of people who prefer KDE, and apparently Linus is one of them.
Aside from being an moral-booster for the KDE-guys, I fail to see the drama in this case. Linus doesn't like GNOME. And he told why he doesn't like GNOME, and his reasons are valid. He's not ordering people to use KDE. He simply said that he recommends KDE over GNOME, and he stated his reasons for doing so. Does this mean that the GNOME-guys are going to pack their bags and start using KDE instead? No. GNOME doesn't need Linus's endorsement to survive.
Like I said, I fail to see the drama here. Is Linus being "self-centered" when he said that "I prefer KDE over GNOME"? That's his personal opinion, and they are all in a way "self-centered", and there's nothing wrong with that. Surely he's entitled to his opinion?
I don't remember him calling prof. Tanenbaum a "FUCKING IDIOT". What happened? Is that guy really Linus?
Where exactly does Linus call anyone a "fucking idiot"? And if you do follow what Linus says aroiund the net, he IS still that down-to-earth guy, who makes fun of himself. Yes he has opinions. So do all of us.
GNOME and KDE are full desktop-environments, whereas *Box is just a windowmanager. So they are not alternatives to each others. While other might do with just a windowmanager, many people want a complete solution.
Exactly. What exactly is new and different in X360 and PS3? Well, they have da internet and they have better CPU's and graphics. So they are basically same stuff as PS2 and original Xbox are, just in a prettier package. Hardly anything revolutionary.
Nintendo Revolution on the other hand... Naturally it's faster than it's predecessor, but not as fast as PS3 or 360. But who cares? I like the fact that Nintendo is trying something different, instead of selling the same gaming-paradigm over and over again. Sure, PS3 and 360 are nice machines. But they are basically same stuff as PS2 and Xbox were before them, only with better graphics. Color me un-impressed.
How can you say that "Market is clearly waiting for better value"? I mean, the product has been out for few weeks now, how do you know how well it's selling?
But if Microsoft comes out with a crappy keyboard or mouse, should you stop buying Microsoft software?
There is a difference between a "bad product" and "product that harms the user". If Microsoft came with a keyboard that contained a keylogger that phoned home for example, I would steer clear of ALL their products, Office included. If Sony comes up with music-discs that open security-holes on my computer, makes the whole system unstable and calls home, I will steer clear of ALL their products. And like I said, this same bullshit-attitude seems to pollute entire Sony, hardware-division included.
You don't seem to understand one fundamental fact: Sony Corporation has the power to fix this situation. They should fire the management of Sony Music, and everyone else connected to this mess. If they do not do that, they are showing to have no remorse over the incident, and they don't therefore deserve my money.
In short: Sony Corporation has the needed powers over Sony Music to take appropriate steps. It's up to them that do they choose to do so.
Regardless of your opinion on the subjects, there is the war in Iraq, Social Security, Health Care, Education, the Economy and about a dozen other topics that deserve some attention before anyone should be cusading for a new document format. I mean seriously, there are so many other more important issues on the table...
Why on Earth are you wasting your time posting on/.? Shouldn't you be in Africa helping the starving, researching AIDS-remedies, preventing global warming and trying to win the War on Terror? I mean, there are so many other more important issues on the table, yet you waste your time on Slashdot....
No, they haven't. Sony Music did. Sony, as a large corporation, has various divisions that don't communicate and operate very well together.
It's still the same corporation. Whether it happens to be different division of that corporation makes no difference. Both divisions answer to same peolle, the board of directors of Sony Corporation. The money Sony Music earns goes to Sony Corporation, and vice versa. The money Sony Electronics makes can be used to benefit Sony Music.
Do people differentiate between different divisons of Microsoft? No. When they do something stupid with Office, people say "Microsoft is at it again". When they do something stupid with Windows, they say the same thing. They do not say "Microsoft's Office-division is at it again!" or "Microsoft Windows-division is at it again!". When MS pushes.doc-format in Office, people blame Microsoft, not just their office-division. When Microsoft screwes up security in Windows, people blame Microsoft, not just their Windows-division. But still, we should treat Sony differently? I don't buy it.
Saying "But it's not the same company, it's a different division!" is just an excuse. They are part of the same company. And you can clearly see the same bullshit attitude Sony Music has, all through the Sony Corporation. Why does Sony Electronics use some proprietary flash-RAM crap (memorystick) for example? Why can't they use compact flash or any other technology that has wider use, why do they stick to their own crap? What the hell is it with this ATRAC-crap Sony Electronics pushes? Sony as a whole is only interested at their bottom line, at the expense of the consumer.
Like the original poster said: Nice camera, but since it's by Sony, I wont be buying it. I'm drawing the line here. You fuck with me, and you can be damn sure that I'll do my business elsewhere. It's about time the corporations learn that world and people living there are not their private playground where they can do whatever they please. Sony Corporation has the power to replace the entire management of Sony Music. Untill I see them doing that, I wont be doing business with them. If they choose not to do that... Well, there are other companies willing to sell me their goods.
mmmm. He wrote a book that sold well and was influential.
Yes he did. And that's just about only worthwhile thing he has done.
He wrote fetchmail which is in every linux distro so I think you have give the man some credit.
So he wrote some small application, big fucking deal. Do you see developers of Frozen Bubble proclaiming themselves as "Uberhackers"? How about developers of Kate, XMMS, NetHack, Kdevelop, Metacity, Procmail, X.org or Amarok? Each of those apps is a lot more impressive and complicated that Fetchmail is. Yet ESR marches around shouting "Bow before me, for I wrote Fetchmail!" (originally it was written by Carl Harris, so ESR can't even take full credit for his most important piece of code). And even Fetchmail is eclipsed by Getmail.
He may be a gasbag but at least he is not a lying peice of shit gasbag like Ballmer or Gates are.
It says quite a bit about ESR that we have to compare him to Gates and Ballmer, in order to find some redeeming qualities in him....
So, why is he then painting himself as some sort of "open source leader"? What exactly has he done? Yes, he wrote The Essay. Woohoo! Can I lick your dingleberries now, ESR? He also wrote dozen or so crappy apps, and he still calls himself ubercoder. He also called himself "core Linux-kernel hacker", yet his efforts there are miniscule and/or failures (the new config-system he proposed? Crashed an burned).
There are LOTS of other people I would give the title of "Open Source leader" to. Hell, there could be several of those at once! ESR is not one of them. He's just riding on his past glory. And yes, he IS a useless windbag. The less he says, the better off the open source-movement is.
Whenever I hear Creative spokesdroids say something, I'm immediately reminded of Aureal and the fate they faced. So Creative wants others to "respect it's IP". It's too bad that Creative has done nothing to earn any respect. They are scum, and anyone with at least one working brain-cell will steer clear of them.
And you are a fucking moron. Allow me to explain this to you using simple words so that even you understand, OK?
Suppose you had those 1000 Chevy Suburbans taking 6 kilometers of road. What happens when you approach that group of cars? Well, when you reach those cars, you would end up standing still. What would happen if those cars were Smarts taking 3 kilometers of space? You could keep on driving for 3 more kilometers before you reach those cars. And you seriously claim that that wouldn't have any effect of traffic-jams? According to you, I would be standing still. But pure logic dictates that there would be lots more free road ahead of me if the cars took less space. The fact that you don't understand that, just underlines the fact that you are a fucking moron. What if each car took only 1 meter of space? Would you still seriously claim that it would have no effect on traffic-jams? What if the drivers left their cars home, and walked on the freeway (while obeying the traffic-rules). They would take a lot less space, but according to you, there would still be "traffic"-jams.
If you have 50 kilometers of road, and you are trying to cram 10000 cars that each take 6 meters of space, what happens? You get a total gridlock, since those cars simply would not fit in that space. But if those cars took 3 meters of space, you would get heavy traffic, but it would be radically different when compared to situation where you have bunch of SUV's taking up the space. Or how about cities? There's only limited amount of space between intersections. If you have SUV's, you could either
a) Only have few cars between the intersections standing in the traffic-lights b) You have more cars that block the roads that cross the other road, creating a gridlock
I guess even you understand situation B, but how about A? In that case the flow of traffic would be less smooth, since only few cars at a time would be moving. But if the cars were smaller, things would be radically different. Again: this is not rocket science.
You only have certain amount of space on the roads. If the cars you are trying to cram to that space consume too much space, you will have traffic-jams. But if those cars take only 50% of the space, the severity of the jams would be seriously lessened. But I guess that asshats like you don't want to hear that that humungous SUV of your might not be the ideal car for traffic-congested roads.
Like I said: this is not rocket-science. But I guess some people simply refuse to accept the truth, because they are unwilling to face the facts.
Come back to me when you have developed even a trace of intelligence and common sense. Until that happens, continuing this discussion is pointless. And in the future, have the guts to NOT post as an AC. But what else can I expect from spineless asshats like you?
and who could say fairer than shoving 4 of these babies together on a board?
Good luck trying that. If you bothered to actually look at the design of the CPU, you would notice that it completely lacks a bus it could use to talk to other CPU's in SMP-configurations. It has GigE, 10GigE and PCI-Express-buses for communicating with outside world, and none of those is ideal for CPU - CPU communication.
So one CPU (granted: with several cores) per system is all you will get. Unless you are building a cluster, but that's a different thing altogether.
It's triple-core all right, but it's NOT PPC970! I REALLY don't understand why people think it's 970. Or is it that since 970 is a PPC-CPU, then all PPC-CPU's are 970's? well, it doesn't quite work that way. There are lots of different PPC-CPU's out there, and 970 is just one of them. The cores in 360 are relatively simple PPC-cores, nothing like 970 (apart from using the same instruction-set).
Hey asshole: why do cars stand still in traffic-jams? Because they are TRYING TO FIT TOO MANY CARS IN A LIMITED SPACE! Comprende, you damn idiot? There's only certain amount of space available, and if the cars take all that space + 30% more (for example), you will get traffic-jams. But if the cars only took 70% of available space, things would be a lot nicer. How could you achieve that? Well, either you have less cars (the ideal solution), or you make sure that the cars don't waste space. Or you do both.
This is not rocket-science, but it seems to be too much for you pea-brains.
Your an idiot! Smaller cars would reduce the severity of traffic jams??? Thank you for posting the single most retarded statement I think I have ever read on/.
I would love an elaboration on how smaller cars in the same volume on the road reduces traffic jams. Idiots like you in smaller cars can mess up traffic as much as other people in big cars. Once again thanks for the laugh.
Suppose you had 1000 Chevy Suburbas on a freeway. Each Suburban is about 5.5 meters long, so lets assume that each Suburban takes 6 meters of space. That 6 kilometers of cars. Now, replace those Suburbans with Smarts. Each smart is 2.5 meters in legth, and lets assume they take 3 meters of space in total. So that's a line of cars 3 kilometers long: half of that with Suburbans. In other words: you can fit twice as many Smart-cars in same length of road as you can with Suburbans. And that would result in less traffic-jams.
Were you honestly surprised that the default (Microsoft) drivers did not include those for an Apple keyboard?
It's not a _MAGICAL_ keyboard. It's just a USB keyboard. So it happens to be made by Apple, so what? And the point was that it required several reboots to get something like keyboard to work! And it took several reboots to get it working again after switching the port it was connceted to!
*sigh*... I'll try to keep this simple, OK? I have one monitor, keyboard and mouse. And I have two computers. The keyboard and the mouse are connected to the two computers via KVM. And the display has two inputs, with one computer (a Linux/W2K tower-PC) is connected to one input, and the Mac is connected to the other input. That display is on my work-desk, as is the keyboard, mouse and the Mac. The PC is under the desk. I do not carry the monitor (or the keyboard, or the mouse, or the PC's) around, they all stay put. No matter which computer I use, I sit by my desk, so I don't have to carry anything around. I switch between the two computers with a button on the display, and a button on the KVM.
Clear now? Or do I have to draw you a picture?
"Do you carry a monitor around with you as well do you?" Sheesh. I really don't understand what makes you think that I'm required to carry ANYTHING around.
I think we're talking past each other, or maybe the question itself is the problem. You're comparing Win2k to MODERN Linux distributions, which I think is a little unfair. Linux has improved since 2000, but so has Windows. Most of your complaints have been addressed in WinXP.
I thought that the original poster was asking for comparison between modern Linux and Windows 2000, but it seems now on second re-read that he was talking about the year 2000, not Windows 2000. So it's my mistake.
Um, Win2K does indeed support driver CDs. The only exception is that during install if you need a third-party driver for your storage controller you can install it using a floppy
And I was talking about installation of the OS! I even said in one of my posts how I installed my NIC from a driver-CD after the OS-installation. I'm well away that W2K supports driver-CD's but NOT DURING THE INSTALLATION OF THE OS. And that was what I said!
Considering that this is ONLY during install and only affects odd storage controllers
The "odd storage controller" was the VIA-controller on my consumer-lever motherboard... Hardly anything exotic.
It's an improvement over most Linux installers I've seen because at least adding a third-party driver during install is an OPTION. This is EXACTLY why most flavors of Linux I've tried won't install on my home system.
IIRC I have seen Linux-installers with options for third-party driver-CD's. And in any case, those drivers are usually fetched automatically from the net during the installation.
Were you on a Dell, by any chance? They have a real issue with not seeing a USB keyboard unless it is in the first USB slot.
It was self-built machine. And it was not a question of computer not recognizing the keyboard. It recognized it just fine. Linux worked right away, and it even worked in GRUB! W2K was the only piece of the computer which would not work with the keyboard automatically. So I would chalk this one as a Windows-problem and not hardware-problem.
Slashdot Mirror
So the head-developer of Linux-kernel said that he prefers KDE over GNOME. He also told his reasons for that, and he said that he disagrees with the direction of GNOME. That's basically what he said, although he used a bit more words than I did ;). And what he did was not wrong. I find it rather strange that many people seem to think that GNOME should be protected from criticism, especially if it comes from some high-profile person. GNOME will manage just fine.
And, like I said, Linus is not ordering people to use KDE instead of GNOME. He apparently recommends it over GNOME, but that's it. And he wasn't "shooting his mouth", he did give valid criticism. And his sentiments are shared by many people.
I bet Alan Cox recommends GNOME over KDE. Oh the humanity!
Why do you think that Linus should NOT criticize GNOME in a plublic mailing-list? Because he happens to be Linus Torvalds? Should the fact that he prefers KDE over GNOME be hidden because it might hurt someone's feelings (if someone's feelings get hurt because of Linus'es choice of desktop, he should get his head examined)?
While Linus is respected, he has no power over people's desktops. I can't really see any GNOME-developers dropping GNOME over this incident.
So Linus should not state his opinion on anything in public because he's Linus Torvalds? Uh, OK.... Lots of people comment on GNOME, KDE, Linux all the time. I think Linus has the right to comment as well should he choose to do so. GNOME won't die if Linus Torvalds uses KDE instead of GNOME.
In essence, that is what he said. He also gave his rationale for his choice (becase he feels that GNOME treats the user like an idiot. And that sentiment is shared by many others, like it or not). If he simply popped in and told everyone that "I use KDE and not GNOME" and vanished, people would propably call him a troll. But he actually gave lengthy rationale as to why he thinks the way he does.
So he should have said "I don't like GNOME that much, but I'm not going to tell you why"? Why do you feel that GNOME should be protected from critism from Linus? Is GNOME like a house of cards that does not survive criticism? I do not think so, do you? Yes, he advices people to use KDE instead of GNOME. So what?
Linus doesn't like the direction of GNOME, and he voiced his opinion in public (as in a relevant mailing-list). Is that really a bad thing? Or are only Joe Sixpacks allowed to comment on GNOME? Why? Because GNOME can't survive critique from a high-profile person? Surely that is not the case?
To some people it is. And that criticism is valid. Many people feel that KDE is a load of crap, for various reasons.
I don't give a flying fuck what they have done in the past. I'm not buying their past products. I'm interested in their CURRENT and upcoming products, because those are the ones I might be buying.
Besides, all those "innovations" listed in the post were optional stuff. In this case, the revolutionary thing is the default method of using the console. You complained that "Each device/gimmick only supported a handful of games, and each time it just looked like Nintendo was trying to cash in". Maybe. And that was because those were optional add-ons that required specific support. This case the "gimmick" is the dominant feature of the console, so the support will be a lot more widespread, and there would not be "cashing in", since it ships with the console.
He had an opinion on the subject-matter, and he stated it. You are free to disagree with his opinion, but does that mean that he shouldn't voice his opinion? And I don't really see what the fuzz is about. There are quite a few people around the net who are irritated by the removal of features in Gnome. Apparently Linus is one of them. There are also lots of people who prefer KDE, and apparently Linus is one of them.
Aside from being an moral-booster for the KDE-guys, I fail to see the drama in this case. Linus doesn't like GNOME. And he told why he doesn't like GNOME, and his reasons are valid. He's not ordering people to use KDE. He simply said that he recommends KDE over GNOME, and he stated his reasons for doing so. Does this mean that the GNOME-guys are going to pack their bags and start using KDE instead? No. GNOME doesn't need Linus's endorsement to survive.
Like I said, I fail to see the drama here. Is Linus being "self-centered" when he said that "I prefer KDE over GNOME"? That's his personal opinion, and they are all in a way "self-centered", and there's nothing wrong with that. Surely he's entitled to his opinion?
Where exactly does Linus call anyone a "fucking idiot"? And if you do follow what Linus says aroiund the net, he IS still that down-to-earth guy, who makes fun of himself. Yes he has opinions. So do all of us.
GNOME and KDE are full desktop-environments, whereas *Box is just a windowmanager. So they are not alternatives to each others. While other might do with just a windowmanager, many people want a complete solution.
Exactly. What exactly is new and different in X360 and PS3? Well, they have da internet and they have better CPU's and graphics. So they are basically same stuff as PS2 and original Xbox are, just in a prettier package. Hardly anything revolutionary.
Nintendo Revolution on the other hand... Naturally it's faster than it's predecessor, but not as fast as PS3 or 360. But who cares? I like the fact that Nintendo is trying something different, instead of selling the same gaming-paradigm over and over again. Sure, PS3 and 360 are nice machines. But they are basically same stuff as PS2 and Xbox were before them, only with better graphics. Color me un-impressed.
How can you say that "Market is clearly waiting for better value"? I mean, the product has been out for few weeks now, how do you know how well it's selling?
There is a difference between a "bad product" and "product that harms the user". If Microsoft came with a keyboard that contained a keylogger that phoned home for example, I would steer clear of ALL their products, Office included. If Sony comes up with music-discs that open security-holes on my computer, makes the whole system unstable and calls home, I will steer clear of ALL their products. And like I said, this same bullshit-attitude seems to pollute entire Sony, hardware-division included.
You don't seem to understand one fundamental fact: Sony Corporation has the power to fix this situation. They should fire the management of Sony Music, and everyone else connected to this mess. If they do not do that, they are showing to have no remorse over the incident, and they don't therefore deserve my money.
In short: Sony Corporation has the needed powers over Sony Music to take appropriate steps. It's up to them that do they choose to do so.
Why on Earth are you wasting your time posting on
Yep. It's not like Sony Electronics pushes non-standard stuff like ATRAC and MemoryStick over widely used alternatives. No sirree!
It's still the same corporation. Whether it happens to be different division of that corporation makes no difference. Both divisions answer to same peolle, the board of directors of Sony Corporation. The money Sony Music earns goes to Sony Corporation, and vice versa. The money Sony Electronics makes can be used to benefit Sony Music.
Do people differentiate between different divisons of Microsoft? No. When they do something stupid with Office, people say "Microsoft is at it again". When they do something stupid with Windows, they say the same thing. They do not say "Microsoft's Office-division is at it again!" or "Microsoft Windows-division is at it again!". When MS pushes
Saying "But it's not the same company, it's a different division!" is just an excuse. They are part of the same company. And you can clearly see the same bullshit attitude Sony Music has, all through the Sony Corporation. Why does Sony Electronics use some proprietary flash-RAM crap (memorystick) for example? Why can't they use compact flash or any other technology that has wider use, why do they stick to their own crap? What the hell is it with this ATRAC-crap Sony Electronics pushes? Sony as a whole is only interested at their bottom line, at the expense of the consumer.
Like the original poster said: Nice camera, but since it's by Sony, I wont be buying it. I'm drawing the line here. You fuck with me, and you can be damn sure that I'll do my business elsewhere. It's about time the corporations learn that world and people living there are not their private playground where they can do whatever they please. Sony Corporation has the power to replace the entire management of Sony Music. Untill I see them doing that, I wont be doing business with them. If they choose not to do that... Well, there are other companies willing to sell me their goods.
Sony Corporation: Go fuck yourself.
Yes he did. And that's just about only worthwhile thing he has done.
So he wrote some small application, big fucking deal. Do you see developers of Frozen Bubble proclaiming themselves as "Uberhackers"? How about developers of Kate, XMMS, NetHack, Kdevelop, Metacity, Procmail, X.org or Amarok? Each of those apps is a lot more impressive and complicated that Fetchmail is. Yet ESR marches around shouting "Bow before me, for I wrote Fetchmail!" (originally it was written by Carl Harris, so ESR can't even take full credit for his most important piece of code). And even Fetchmail is eclipsed by Getmail.
It says quite a bit about ESR that we have to compare him to Gates and Ballmer, in order to find some redeeming qualities in him....
So, why is he then painting himself as some sort of "open source leader"? What exactly has he done? Yes, he wrote The Essay. Woohoo! Can I lick your dingleberries now, ESR? He also wrote dozen or so crappy apps, and he still calls himself ubercoder. He also called himself "core Linux-kernel hacker", yet his efforts there are miniscule and/or failures (the new config-system he proposed? Crashed an burned).
There are LOTS of other people I would give the title of "Open Source leader" to. Hell, there could be several of those at once! ESR is not one of them. He's just riding on his past glory. And yes, he IS a useless windbag. The less he says, the better off the open source-movement is.
Whenever I hear Creative spokesdroids say something, I'm immediately reminded of Aureal and the fate they faced. So Creative wants others to "respect it's IP". It's too bad that Creative has done nothing to earn any respect. They are scum, and anyone with at least one working brain-cell will steer clear of them.
And you are a fucking moron. Allow me to explain this to you using simple words so that even you understand, OK?
Suppose you had those 1000 Chevy Suburbans taking 6 kilometers of road. What happens when you approach that group of cars? Well, when you reach those cars, you would end up standing still. What would happen if those cars were Smarts taking 3 kilometers of space? You could keep on driving for 3 more kilometers before you reach those cars. And you seriously claim that that wouldn't have any effect of traffic-jams? According to you, I would be standing still. But pure logic dictates that there would be lots more free road ahead of me if the cars took less space. The fact that you don't understand that, just underlines the fact that you are a fucking moron. What if each car took only 1 meter of space? Would you still seriously claim that it would have no effect on traffic-jams? What if the drivers left their cars home, and walked on the freeway (while obeying the traffic-rules). They would take a lot less space, but according to you, there would still be "traffic"-jams.
If you have 50 kilometers of road, and you are trying to cram 10000 cars that each take 6 meters of space, what happens? You get a total gridlock, since those cars simply would not fit in that space. But if those cars took 3 meters of space, you would get heavy traffic, but it would be radically different when compared to situation where you have bunch of SUV's taking up the space. Or how about cities? There's only limited amount of space between intersections. If you have SUV's, you could either
a) Only have few cars between the intersections standing in the traffic-lights
b) You have more cars that block the roads that cross the other road, creating a gridlock
I guess even you understand situation B, but how about A? In that case the flow of traffic would be less smooth, since only few cars at a time would be moving. But if the cars were smaller, things would be radically different. Again: this is not rocket science.
You only have certain amount of space on the roads. If the cars you are trying to cram to that space consume too much space, you will have traffic-jams. But if those cars take only 50% of the space, the severity of the jams would be seriously lessened. But I guess that asshats like you don't want to hear that that humungous SUV of your might not be the ideal car for traffic-congested roads.
Like I said: this is not rocket-science. But I guess some people simply refuse to accept the truth, because they are unwilling to face the facts.
Come back to me when you have developed even a trace of intelligence and common sense. Until that happens, continuing this discussion is pointless. And in the future, have the guts to NOT post as an AC. But what else can I expect from spineless asshats like you?
Good luck trying that. If you bothered to actually look at the design of the CPU, you would notice that it completely lacks a bus it could use to talk to other CPU's in SMP-configurations. It has GigE, 10GigE and PCI-Express-buses for communicating with outside world, and none of those is ideal for CPU - CPU communication.
So one CPU (granted: with several cores) per system is all you will get. Unless you are building a cluster, but that's a different thing altogether.
It's triple-core all right, but it's NOT PPC970! I REALLY don't understand why people think it's 970. Or is it that since 970 is a PPC-CPU, then all PPC-CPU's are 970's? well, it doesn't quite work that way. There are lots of different PPC-CPU's out there, and 970 is just one of them. The cores in 360 are relatively simple PPC-cores, nothing like 970 (apart from using the same instruction-set).
Hey asshole: why do cars stand still in traffic-jams? Because they are TRYING TO FIT TOO MANY CARS IN A LIMITED SPACE! Comprende, you damn idiot? There's only certain amount of space available, and if the cars take all that space + 30% more (for example), you will get traffic-jams. But if the cars only took 70% of available space, things would be a lot nicer. How could you achieve that? Well, either you have less cars (the ideal solution), or you make sure that the cars don't waste space. Or you do both.
This is not rocket-science, but it seems to be too much for you pea-brains.
Suppose you had 1000 Chevy Suburbas on a freeway. Each Suburban is about 5.5 meters long, so lets assume that each Suburban takes 6 meters of space. That 6 kilometers of cars. Now, replace those Suburbans with Smarts. Each smart is 2.5 meters in legth, and lets assume they take 3 meters of space in total. So that's a line of cars 3 kilometers long: half of that with Suburbans. In other words: you can fit twice as many Smart-cars in same length of road as you can with Suburbans. And that would result in less traffic-jams.
It's not a _MAGICAL_ keyboard. It's just a USB keyboard. So it happens to be made by Apple, so what? And the point was that it required several reboots to get something like keyboard to work! And it took several reboots to get it working again after switching the port it was connceted to!
*sigh*... I'll try to keep this simple, OK? I have one monitor, keyboard and mouse. And I have two computers. The keyboard and the mouse are connected to the two computers via KVM. And the display has two inputs, with one computer (a Linux/W2K tower-PC) is connected to one input, and the Mac is connected to the other input. That display is on my work-desk, as is the keyboard, mouse and the Mac. The PC is under the desk. I do not carry the monitor (or the keyboard, or the mouse, or the PC's) around, they all stay put. No matter which computer I use, I sit by my desk, so I don't have to carry anything around. I switch between the two computers with a button on the display, and a button on the KVM.
Clear now? Or do I have to draw you a picture?
"Do you carry a monitor around with you as well do you?" Sheesh. I really don't understand what makes you think that I'm required to carry ANYTHING around.
I thought that the original poster was asking for comparison between modern Linux and Windows 2000, but it seems now on second re-read that he was talking about the year 2000, not Windows 2000. So it's my mistake.
And I was talking about installation of the OS! I even said in one of my posts how I installed my NIC from a driver-CD after the OS-installation. I'm well away that W2K supports driver-CD's but NOT DURING THE INSTALLATION OF THE OS. And that was what I said!
The "odd storage controller" was the VIA-controller on my consumer-lever motherboard... Hardly anything exotic.
IIRC I have seen Linux-installers with options for third-party driver-CD's. And in any case, those drivers are usually fetched automatically from the net during the installation.
You see, we have these little gizmos available these days...
It was self-built machine. And it was not a question of computer not recognizing the keyboard. It recognized it just fine. Linux worked right away, and it even worked in GRUB! W2K was the only piece of the computer which would not work with the keyboard automatically. So I would chalk this one as a Windows-problem and not hardware-problem.