I do have to wonder what VMware is hoping to get out of this... Basically they are only selling the support and management products and completely opening up the VM end of their business. Is this to stop the mass migration to XEN?
Actually, they're not even close to opening up the vm portion of their business. They are opening a specific segment of their business, and, in turn, llikely to gain much more business. So, let's check out their listing of free, shall we?
VMWare Player
Somebody sends you a group of files which make up a virtual machine. Now, you can run the stuff in that virtual machine. However, you may not change the settings. Don't like how much RAM the VM uses? Too bad. Oh, you may also not create new virtual machines, just run ones that have been made for you.
VMWare Server
This, basically, replaces VMWare GSX Server. Major difference? It also runs on Linux now (GSX only ran on Windows). You can create VMs, but you may not limit them in certain ways. For comparison, in ESX, you may limit the amount of CPU usage, and in the amount of disk bandwidth usage, etc. Server (and GSX) you are not able to do this. There are other limitations. Major benefits of VMWare Server? You can run multiple guest OSes as services, needing no monitor/mouse/keyboard to make them work. This is wonderful for remote/headless installs.
So, what's left for them? More than you would think. First, for features only available under VMWare ESX/Virtual Infrastructure
VMWare HA
Automatically move VMs from crashed hosts to still running hosts in seconds. Reboot crashed VMs automatically. etc.
VMWare DRS
Move VMs from high load to low load hosts with no downtime
VMotion
Oh yes, you can move VMs around from server to server without any downtime. How sweet is that?
And now, VMWare Workstation
Creation
You can create new virtual machines, something which VMWare Player does not allow you to do.
Configuration Change
Change memory, add virtual disks, etc. Something which VMWare Player denies you as well.
Virtual Teams
How about a whole cluster of virtual machines which can start and run, and work together, as one unit, instead of just a bunch of individual virtual machines which have to be manually started/stopped? Perfect for demo'ing complex apps on multiple (x86) platforms
So, what do they get out of it? They get to tease you with the good stuff. And when you're ready for it, you'll come back and buy it. Because it really is that good. And no, I don't work for them. I'm just a very happy customer.
VMWare Server does not require a display, Workstation does
VMWare Server has a web interface for controlling start, stop, and various configuration bits of vmware. Workstation does not
VMWare Server is still in beta, and as such, the license keys expire periodically. Supposedly, this will not happen when it is released sometime this summer.
Using the remote console, you can connect to your vmware server hosted machines across the network. With workstation, this is not possible.
VMWare Server is free. Workstation is not.
VMWare Server works with (at least) version 2.6.15 of linux kernel. Workstation requires unofficial patches.
So, why would you use Workstation over Server? Support, for one. You can get an actual support contract for Workstation. Whether or not this will be available for Server is unclear at this time. The snapshot manager for Workstation is much more advanced than it is for Server. And, to some degree, Workstation is more convenient on a desktop/laptop than Server.
So, while not a comprehensive list, this gives some idea of the major differences I've noticed using them both.
Asset Tracker, a system which integrates wonderfully with Request Tracker is worth looking at, definitely. It has something of a learning and configuration curve, to be sure. Once you're over that, though, it works like a charm. Oh, and the price is right, too: Free.
Compensation: $15/hr for first 2 - 4 weeks: Likely leads to $30K - $35K annual compensation + benefits and 401K
Wow, somebody missed the math on that one. 2080 work hours per year. This works out to (at $30,000/yr) $14.42/hr all the way up to (at $35,000/yr) $16.83. Damn, let me move to take that job!
If the accuracy of the machine can be demonstrated why is anyone entitled to the source as part of a criminal trial?
Because the accuracy of the machine can only be demonstrated with the test data that is available. While this should be very close to reality, we have no way of verifying that the test data chosen is relevant to the case of the person on trial. With the source code, we can verify the implementation, and make sure that that implementation will accurately reflect on the defendant.
Put another way: This software is only slightly less critical than the software which is used in the space program. There, people die. In this case, lives can be destroyed by a wrongful conviction. At least if you die, your problems are over and done with. Now, what if a particular test case was missed? How would you know? Even worse, what if THAT test case shows that one in every 10 readings will be wildly inaccurate? Without the source code, what chance do you have of proving this?
It's funny. I don't often comment, but this time I feel like I have to.
Well, possibly because 99% (conservatively) of all Windows programs are packaged correctly - and this holds true on everything from, say, MyMinesweeper to DB2.
<Arthur Dent voice> This must be some new usage of the word correct I wasn't aware of<Arthur Dent voice>
I really have to disagree with you. You see, I've had to scrub my system after uninstalling programs because these correctly written installers couldn't clean up after themselves. I've also found any number of programs which require me to have a company name on my home machine. I'm sorry, but it's home. I don't have a business. But, without that having something in it, I can't finish installing the program.
As for problems with rpm, I'd rather not go there. I've helped people install Request Tracker under Fedora Core 4, even, and it's hell. Using rpm's, and yum, and even trying to get it working from rpm's online, and it sucks. Anytime somebody wants to tell me how wonderful RH or Fedora is, I wanna smack them. It hurts to use. Gimme Debian any day.
But for Joe Schmo developer - what's the path for him to get his app into the distributions trees again? How is this simple? And why is it his problem to do a separate build every time a new distro comes out with a slightly changed packaging procedure?
Would you really like to compare the different packaging methods on Linux with the different packaging methods on Windows? MSI, Installshield (and about 4 different subtypes), NSIS, InnoSetup, Wise, a few other big ones, and let's not forget those who say that all of those are broken and so therefore roll their own. And with each succeeding version of Windows, the "official" procedure changes slightly. Why is it Joe Schmo's problem to deal with the ever changing Windows target?
Thank you. I've heard of David Brin before, but never read anything of his. This story was amazing, and I'm off to buy the entire Uplift saga today. I've got some reading to do:)
Umm, actually, you are the one who has the terms mixed up. Free Software (note the capitalization) is, by definition, free as in speech. Open Source software is not the same, and makes a few concessions to allow businesses an easier time at making money (in addition to being a more business friendly term). Finally, free software (again, note the capitalization) is simply free as in beer, and does not (normally) show you the source code.
In the case of Java, for instance, every program must declare a class with one public static void method taking an array of strings as an argument. That's why nobody uses Java as a command shell.
What's the problem with that?.
The problem with that is for extremely simple programs. And by extremely simple, I'm talking about stuff that barely even qualifies as a program, but would be tiresome to type over and over again. Consider, for example, the case of the classic "Hello, World" program, that the GP gave.
In sh, it's one line, literally. There's no command line parameters, nothing. Just print something out. In Java, you must have three lines in a file, and then you must compile that three line program. All for something meant to display something on the screen that the user is not meant to change.
So, what's the problem with all of that? Sometimes, you really do want to have just a short script, simple, doing the same few commands regularly. Java (or other compiled languages) add a layer of overhead which is completely not necessary for such items.
If you allow aliases, or UNIX commands like "w", you can write meaningful one-character programs. (This is impossible in Java, no matter what definitions or libraries you presuppose.)
Wrong. Aliases has nothing to do with a language. You can alias w=java -jar myapp.jar or whatever command line you want, or write a shell script to do the same, which is the usual way to start a Java program.
Actually, you've missed the point he was trying to make: It is possible to write shell scripts which do something genuinely useful with only a very few characters. This is, unfortunately, not possible with a full compiled language, such as java, or c, or c++, etc.
If not why would it matter if their using your unused bandwidth?
Well, it matters because my upstream bandwidth is how I get requests to web sites to give me a page. At one point, my cable modem was basically useless due to a bittorrent download that was taking multiple days. I had enough of the file that many peers were connecting to me and requesting chunks. This meant that my upstream was saturated.
Once I figured out what was happening, I put a brake on it, limiting my max upload rate to about half my upstream bandwidth. I was giving again, and getting again, but was also able to use the cable modem for the other uses I had for it.
Besides, it's not the type of pieces you play with, but how throughly you can crush your opponent.
I've got one for you: Playing PalmChess, I managed to beat the computer so badly that, even if the king had the option of moving anywhwere on the board except on top of my king, I still would have been able to take the king right away. No, I did not have to use undo move. And no, I did not create a stalemate even once. Mind you, I only did that once, but I've still done it.
From the viewpoint of the health of the society, it is not "evil" to force these people to pay their fair share of the services that they are being provided.
So, you advocate taking by force from those who would not give willingly? Why? Why not simply deny them the services? After all, they are choosing not to use the same rules the rest of the society is choosing. Eject them from said society. When they wish to play by the same rules, allow them back in. And yes, I am serious. Taking by force is also known as stealing, and we don't like it when people do that to us. Why condone it (under any circumstances) when we do it to others?
When it comes to ethics and morals, the guiding principle should be: do not harm others.
Well, unless those others are trying to harm me or my friends or my family or... You get the point. Something I've always tried to do is come up with a coherent, universally applicable, set of morals and ethics. I think I've come up with one such possibility, though I'm not at all sure what it does to capitalism yet (still working on that aspect). If you will forgive some slightly rambling thoughts...
So, how does my system work? Simple: When we are born, we are given a chunk of time. It is the one thing that uniquely belongs to us. The time that each of us is alive truly belongs to the person who is alive. If you don't agree with that statement, the rest of my idea is bunk, so you can stop reading now. That's part 1.
Part 2 provides a method of getting the things we need: Basically, I exchange a slice of my time for something. The easiest and most common exchange is that of time for money (ie: getting paid to do a job). This allows me to get food without having to harm someone, for instance.
Part 3 provides a definition of evil: Anything which takes time from me without my consent is immoral and unethical.
So, how do these pieces tie together with copyright? I'm still not entirely sure. After all, the producer of the copyrighted material has already spent time producing it. Some of them produced it with the expectation of making money, and others produced it simply to produce it. For those who made it just to make it, no money is required. Indeed, they often give away what they can. For the others, it's a bit murkier.
If they produced for money, the question arises: How much should they get? After all, they have spent the time already. A fair amount would be, at a minimum, compensation for the time spent overall. This, though, brings up another question: What if what they produced sucks, and nobody wants it? Should they still be compensated? I'll assume no. This places a value on the produced result, somehow...
I have to admit that I'm getting confused by my own thoughts here, as it's a bit early for me to be writing such things (it's almost 9am for me). So, I'll ask anybody out there: Help me finish this? I'd definitely appreciate it.
Anyone know why this is (is NTFS slow, or is it the del command as the author guessed, or is there some other reason for this).
Actually, a big chunk of this is screen I/O. The fix? Instead of using del (which likes to print out the names of all files it deletes), use rmdir/s/q. It goes much much faster (and yes, this is speaking from experience, though good experience, for a change).
Funny thing, that... See, I have an ATI All In Wonder Radeon. I wanted to make my computer be my vcr, dvd player, etc (what can I say, I got divorced, got out with my computer, and that was it for entertainment). So, I used the software that came with it, and got something moderately functional. Not great, but functional. Then I decided I wanted a remote control for it all.
Now, before I tell you what happened, let me tell you about me: BS in CS, working on home computers for about 20 years (started on Apple ][ and Vic-20, worked my way up Commodore's line, right on through the Amiga, before it died and I had to replace it with clone stuff). I write code. Play games. Build networks, pcs, and do general repair/maintenance (but no soldering, I don't have a steady enough hand for that). I grok the computer in a way that people around me just don't quite understand. I do things, and they just wonder how I knew to do it.
So, what happened with the remote? I got a lot of functionality working. Able to start file playback, already had working vcr functionality, so was going good. Then... then I tried to make the power button on the remote into a toggle for putting the monitor into standby mode. Monitor in standby? Wake it up. Monitor awake? Put it in standby.
The damned remote control software stumped me. I spent over two weeks trying to make it do just that. I could set it so the power button would either always wake up the monitor, or always put it to sleep, but could never make it toggle. I decided I'd had enough. Bought an ATI TV Wonder, installed Linux, MythTV, and lirc, an had a working setup. Oh, and the time? About two weeks, including all tweaking. That was almost two years ago, and I haven't rebooted Windows since then.
In fact, I thought I'd deleted it off of all partitions, and recently found a copy hidden on that computer. Forgot it was there. Anyway, Linux is unusable? People can't make it do what they want? Maybe they can't, but I sure as hell can. And do. So please, don't call it unusable.It's only unusable for people who are even worse than my mom at computers (mind you, she still doesn't really understand the idea of folders even).
Since she uses Linux every time she goes online, I have to conclude that, if you believe Linux is unusable, you desparately need to check into computer rehab, and get some better skills.
Do me a favor then: Write it so that/home gets its own partition, and that partition is not wiped when the reinstall happens. Would be nice to be able to let the user keep all data when rebuilding the machine.
I don't think anyone would stoop so low as to say they put out the WORST product out in the market
No, those honors belonged to Rational Corporation (a company whose products were so unstable that it made Windows 95 look good) and IBS, the makers of SBN, the most foul program to ever disgrace the software industry.
a/v conversation? No, I don't believe so. And am not sure about the pictures either. Custom emoticons and file transfer, yes.
Now, for the transports, what's wrong with that? Personally, I find it excellent. When this shitstorm with Yahoo is resolved, I'm going to upgrade the transport, and everybody who uses my server will be updated. They don't have to do anything but wait. So, what's wrong with that idea again?
Slashdot Mirror
I stand corrected. For some reason, I thought that GSX was a Windows only product. Don't know how I got that impression, either.
I just re-read the license. That is not a restriction in the use of VMWare Server that I could find at all.
Actually, they're not even close to opening up the vm portion of their business. They are opening a specific segment of their business, and, in turn, llikely to gain much more business. So, let's check out their listing of free, shall we?
VMWare Player Somebody sends you a group of files which make up a virtual machine. Now, you can run the stuff in that virtual machine. However, you may not change the settings. Don't like how much RAM the VM uses? Too bad. Oh, you may also not create new virtual machines, just run ones that have been made for you. VMWare Server This, basically, replaces VMWare GSX Server. Major difference? It also runs on Linux now (GSX only ran on Windows). You can create VMs, but you may not limit them in certain ways. For comparison, in ESX, you may limit the amount of CPU usage, and in the amount of disk bandwidth usage, etc. Server (and GSX) you are not able to do this. There are other limitations. Major benefits of VMWare Server? You can run multiple guest OSes as services, needing no monitor/mouse/keyboard to make them work. This is wonderful for remote/headless installs.
So, what's left for them? More than you would think. First, for features only available under VMWare ESX/Virtual Infrastructure
VMWare HA Automatically move VMs from crashed hosts to still running hosts in seconds. Reboot crashed VMs automatically. etc. VMWare DRS Move VMs from high load to low load hosts with no downtime VMotion Oh yes, you can move VMs around from server to server without any downtime. How sweet is that?
And now, VMWare Workstation
Creation You can create new virtual machines, something which VMWare Player does not allow you to do. Configuration Change Change memory, add virtual disks, etc. Something which VMWare Player denies you as well. Virtual Teams How about a whole cluster of virtual machines which can start and run, and work together, as one unit, instead of just a bunch of individual virtual machines which have to be manually started/stopped? Perfect for demo'ing complex apps on multiple (x86) platforms
So, what do they get out of it? They get to tease you with the good stuff. And when you're ready for it, you'll come back and buy it. Because it really is that good. And no, I don't work for them. I'm just a very happy customer.
So, why would you use Workstation over Server? Support, for one. You can get an actual support contract for Workstation. Whether or not this will be available for Server is unclear at this time. The snapshot manager for Workstation is much more advanced than it is for Server. And, to some degree, Workstation is more convenient on a desktop/laptop than Server.
So, while not a comprehensive list, this gives some idea of the major differences I've noticed using them both.
Asset Tracker, a system which integrates wonderfully with Request Tracker is worth looking at, definitely. It has something of a learning and configuration curve, to be sure. Once you're over that, though, it works like a charm. Oh, and the price is right, too: Free.
Compensation: $15/hr for first 2 - 4 weeks: Likely leads to $30K - $35K annual compensation + benefits and 401K
Wow, somebody missed the math on that one. 2080 work hours per year. This works out to (at $30,000/yr) $14.42/hr all the way up to (at $35,000/yr) $16.83. Damn, let me move to take that job!
<pedant>No, NTSC is 352x240 (roughly). Standard DVD is 720x480. I forget what PAL is, though, sorry.<pedant>
Because the accuracy of the machine can only be demonstrated with the test data that is available. While this should be very close to reality, we have no way of verifying that the test data chosen is relevant to the case of the person on trial. With the source code, we can verify the implementation, and make sure that that implementation will accurately reflect on the defendant.
Put another way: This software is only slightly less critical than the software which is used in the space program. There, people die. In this case, lives can be destroyed by a wrongful conviction. At least if you die, your problems are over and done with. Now, what if a particular test case was missed? How would you know? Even worse, what if THAT test case shows that one in every 10 readings will be wildly inaccurate? Without the source code, what chance do you have of proving this?
It's funny. I don't often comment, but this time I feel like I have to.
Well, possibly because 99% (conservatively) of all Windows programs are packaged correctly - and this holds true on everything from, say, MyMinesweeper to DB2.
<Arthur Dent voice> This must be some new usage of the word correct I wasn't aware of<Arthur Dent voice>
I really have to disagree with you. You see, I've had to scrub my system after uninstalling programs because these correctly written installers couldn't clean up after themselves. I've also found any number of programs which require me to have a company name on my home machine. I'm sorry, but it's home. I don't have a business. But, without that having something in it, I can't finish installing the program.
As for problems with rpm, I'd rather not go there. I've helped people install Request Tracker under Fedora Core 4, even, and it's hell. Using rpm's, and yum, and even trying to get it working from rpm's online, and it sucks. Anytime somebody wants to tell me how wonderful RH or Fedora is, I wanna smack them. It hurts to use. Gimme Debian any day.
But for Joe Schmo developer - what's the path for him to get his app into the distributions trees again? How is this simple? And why is it his problem to do a separate build every time a new distro comes out with a slightly changed packaging procedure?
Would you really like to compare the different packaging methods on Linux with the different packaging methods on Windows? MSI, Installshield (and about 4 different subtypes), NSIS, InnoSetup, Wise, a few other big ones, and let's not forget those who say that all of those are broken and so therefore roll their own. And with each succeeding version of Windows, the "official" procedure changes slightly. Why is it Joe Schmo's problem to deal with the ever changing Windows target?
Thank you. I've heard of David Brin before, but never read anything of his. This story was amazing, and I'm off to buy the entire Uplift saga today. I've got some reading to do :)
Umm, actually, you are the one who has the terms mixed up. Free Software (note the capitalization) is, by definition, free as in speech. Open Source software is not the same, and makes a few concessions to allow businesses an easier time at making money (in addition to being a more business friendly term). Finally, free software (again, note the capitalization) is simply free as in beer, and does not (normally) show you the source code.
In the case of Java, for instance, every program must declare a class with one public static void method taking an array of strings as an argument. That's why nobody uses Java as a command shell.
What's the problem with that?.
The problem with that is for extremely simple programs. And by extremely simple, I'm talking about stuff that barely even qualifies as a program, but would be tiresome to type over and over again. Consider, for example, the case of the classic "Hello, World" program, that the GP gave.
In sh, it's one line, literally. There's no command line parameters, nothing. Just print something out. In Java, you must have three lines in a file, and then you must compile that three line program. All for something meant to display something on the screen that the user is not meant to change.
So, what's the problem with all of that? Sometimes, you really do want to have just a short script, simple, doing the same few commands regularly. Java (or other compiled languages) add a layer of overhead which is completely not necessary for such items.
If you allow aliases, or UNIX commands like "w", you can write meaningful one-character programs. (This is impossible in Java, no matter what definitions or libraries you presuppose.)
Wrong. Aliases has nothing to do with a language. You can alias w=java -jar myapp.jar or whatever command line you want, or write a shell script to do the same, which is the usual way to start a Java program.
Actually, you've missed the point he was trying to make: It is possible to write shell scripts which do something genuinely useful with only a very few characters. This is, unfortunately, not possible with a full compiled language, such as java, or c, or c++, etc.
If not why would it matter if their using your unused bandwidth?
Well, it matters because my upstream bandwidth is how I get requests to web sites to give me a page. At one point, my cable modem was basically useless due to a bittorrent download that was taking multiple days. I had enough of the file that many peers were connecting to me and requesting chunks. This meant that my upstream was saturated.
Once I figured out what was happening, I put a brake on it, limiting my max upload rate to about half my upstream bandwidth. I was giving again, and getting again, but was also able to use the cable modem for the other uses I had for it.
You might wanna check out SQLite, which is in the public domain. It matches all of your requirements, and then some, I think.
Besides, it's not the type of pieces you play with, but how throughly you can crush your opponent.
I've got one for you: Playing PalmChess, I managed to beat the computer so badly that, even if the king had the option of moving anywhwere on the board except on top of my king, I still would have been able to take the king right away. No, I did not have to use undo move. And no, I did not create a stalemate even once. Mind you, I only did that once, but I've still done it.
From the viewpoint of the health of the society, it is not "evil" to force these people to pay their fair share of the services that they are being provided.
So, you advocate taking by force from those who would not give willingly? Why? Why not simply deny them the services? After all, they are choosing not to use the same rules the rest of the society is choosing. Eject them from said society. When they wish to play by the same rules, allow them back in. And yes, I am serious. Taking by force is also known as stealing, and we don't like it when people do that to us. Why condone it (under any circumstances) when we do it to others?
When it comes to ethics and morals, the guiding principle should be: do not harm others.
Well, unless those others are trying to harm me or my friends or my family or ... You get the point. Something I've always tried to do is come up with a coherent, universally applicable, set of morals and ethics. I think I've come up with one such possibility, though I'm not at all sure what it does to capitalism yet (still working on that aspect). If you will forgive some slightly rambling thoughts...
So, how does my system work? Simple: When we are born, we are given a chunk of time. It is the one thing that uniquely belongs to us. The time that each of us is alive truly belongs to the person who is alive. If you don't agree with that statement, the rest of my idea is bunk, so you can stop reading now. That's part 1.
Part 2 provides a method of getting the things we need: Basically, I exchange a slice of my time for something. The easiest and most common exchange is that of time for money (ie: getting paid to do a job). This allows me to get food without having to harm someone, for instance.
Part 3 provides a definition of evil: Anything which takes time from me without my consent is immoral and unethical.
So, how do these pieces tie together with copyright? I'm still not entirely sure. After all, the producer of the copyrighted material has already spent time producing it. Some of them produced it with the expectation of making money, and others produced it simply to produce it. For those who made it just to make it, no money is required. Indeed, they often give away what they can. For the others, it's a bit murkier.
If they produced for money, the question arises: How much should they get? After all, they have spent the time already. A fair amount would be, at a minimum, compensation for the time spent overall. This, though, brings up another question: What if what they produced sucks, and nobody wants it? Should they still be compensated? I'll assume no. This places a value on the produced result, somehow...
I have to admit that I'm getting confused by my own thoughts here, as it's a bit early for me to be writing such things (it's almost 9am for me). So, I'll ask anybody out there: Help me finish this? I'd definitely appreciate it.
Anyone know why this is (is NTFS slow, or is it the del command as the author guessed, or is there some other reason for this).
Actually, a big chunk of this is screen I/O. The fix? Instead of using del (which likes to print out the names of all files it deletes), use rmdir /s /q. It goes much much faster (and yes, this is speaking from experience, though good experience, for a change).
Linux is unusable
Funny thing, that... See, I have an ATI All In Wonder Radeon. I wanted to make my computer be my vcr, dvd player, etc (what can I say, I got divorced, got out with my computer, and that was it for entertainment). So, I used the software that came with it, and got something moderately functional. Not great, but functional. Then I decided I wanted a remote control for it all.
Now, before I tell you what happened, let me tell you about me: BS in CS, working on home computers for about 20 years (started on Apple ][ and Vic-20, worked my way up Commodore's line, right on through the Amiga, before it died and I had to replace it with clone stuff). I write code. Play games. Build networks, pcs, and do general repair/maintenance (but no soldering, I don't have a steady enough hand for that). I grok the computer in a way that people around me just don't quite understand. I do things, and they just wonder how I knew to do it.
So, what happened with the remote? I got a lot of functionality working. Able to start file playback, already had working vcr functionality, so was going good. Then ... then I tried to make the power button on the remote into a toggle for putting the monitor into standby mode. Monitor in standby? Wake it up. Monitor awake? Put it in standby.
The damned remote control software stumped me. I spent over two weeks trying to make it do just that. I could set it so the power button would either always wake up the monitor, or always put it to sleep, but could never make it toggle. I decided I'd had enough. Bought an ATI TV Wonder, installed Linux, MythTV, and lirc, an had a working setup. Oh, and the time? About two weeks, including all tweaking. That was almost two years ago, and I haven't rebooted Windows since then.
In fact, I thought I'd deleted it off of all partitions, and recently found a copy hidden on that computer. Forgot it was there. Anyway, Linux is unusable? People can't make it do what they want? Maybe they can't, but I sure as hell can. And do. So please, don't call it unusable.It's only unusable for people who are even worse than my mom at computers (mind you, she still doesn't really understand the idea of folders even).
Since she uses Linux every time she goes online, I have to conclude that, if you believe Linux is unusable, you desparately need to check into computer rehab, and get some better skills.
But you Unix types wouldn't bat an eye if the text read "...replacing Windows 95 with emacs!"
Well, that's because emacs is an operating system, as opposed to Office 97, which is just a so-so text editor
Do me a favor then: Write it so that /home gets its own partition, and that partition is not wiped when the reinstall happens. Would be nice to be able to let the user keep all data when rebuilding the machine.
I don't think anyone would stoop so low as to say they put out the WORST product out in the market
No, those honors belonged to Rational Corporation (a company whose products were so unstable that it made Windows 95 look good) and IBS, the makers of SBN, the most foul program to ever disgrace the software industry.
a/v conversation? No, I don't believe so. And am not sure about the pictures either. Custom emoticons and file transfer, yes.
Now, for the transports, what's wrong with that? Personally, I find it excellent. When this shitstorm with Yahoo is resolved, I'm going to upgrade the transport, and everybody who uses my server will be updated. They don't have to do anything but wait. So, what's wrong with that idea again?
Protocol: Jabber. Best client for it? hard to say, but my favorite is Psi. And I'm working on spreading the word to everybody that I can.