Re:We're talking about Samba and Linux here...
on
Samba 3 By Example
·
· Score: 1
Windows DOES back up the registry at every successful reboot (at least XP does). It also backs it up every time a software program or driver is installed.
We're talking about Samba and Linux here...
on
Samba 3 By Example
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I've been struggling to keep up with the cryptic voodoo that is Windows networking.
The cryptic voodoo I struggle to keep up with is Samba and Linux itself. Setting up networking, even advanced domain stuff, in Windows is very easy in comparison. Hence books like this one.
I don't mean to troll, but one of Linux's biggest problems from a usability point of view is that there is no central place where configuration information is stored (aka the "hated" registry in Windows). It's supposed to end up in/etc but many times it doesn't and instead it's all scattered around in hundreds of tiny text files with various different formats that one must search out and edit. This is one of the (many) things that make it very difficult to set up or configure anything in Linux, be it hardware or software.
I think we would all be better off if the Linux community would work on fixing usability problems and making Linux more unified instead of continually adding new features. And if that sounds like many criticisms of Microsoft you've heard, then so be it.
Re:excellent! i have been looking for this
on
Samba 3 By Example
·
· Score: 0, Troll
overall my impression is that in total i suppose you would need less time to set up and maintain a nice samba server than a w2k server, even if it is your first time installing linux.
Haha. Right. The setting up part will make you pull out your hair in consernation. One of the downfalls of Samba and Linux in general is that, while it is customizeable and extendable in the extreme, this customization and extension is not down in a very elegant or universal way and so it is very difficult to set up and make work correctly. Hence the plethora of Linux books that spend chapters discussing the most simple tasks, such as making a sound card work (see previous slashdoted article on Linux and soundcards).
that on a page about interface design that the text in the contents bar of the web page is overflowing out of the bar? This seems like a rather poor interface design standard to me...
I am currently running post XP RC2 that came out last Wednesday and trust me when I say that Java is very easy to get. Whenever you access a page that needs Java an IE dialog box appears which asks, "Would you like to download the Java Virtual Machine?" and you say "Install" and it goes automatically and gets that good old crappy MS JVM implementation and autoinstalls it for you.
I personally don't think that not having a JVM is going to deter XP users in the least from running applets in Java and if it's a server side app or something that's installed from a CD then it's not even an issue as Sun or IBM's newest JVMs can be installed.
The fact that Sony is currently 'evaluating' whether or not it is profitable to release the system doesn't seem like a very good sign in its favor. In fact I tend to think that this is probably vaporware and importing a japanese ps2 and development kit is as close as you'll get to Linux on PS2 (or at least the official Sony Linux; what others do is up to them!).
Traditionally in the videogame business, there have been many products that were released only in Japan, including both hardware and games. Usually the companies cited economic reasons for not bringing the products over here (they didn't they would sell well).
I agree. As I understand it, X was not originally designed to be a desktop GUI environment for a single machine anyway, but rather to serve other computers.
The current trend of trying to turn X into the next Windows does not seem like an extremely profitable one and it certainly wouldn't work well in an environment with limited RAM and single application needs like a ps2-turned-development-machine would be.
he, he.
Okay, I would like to see a link to prove that all of that fits in a meg of ram. Maybe you can "save" it in that amount of memory on a memory stick, but that doesn't mean that's how much the game is using while you're playing it.
Secondly, the reason that developers can do such amazing things with consoles is that they have a unified development platform. There were games on the original playstation that were as good and better than the crop of pc games at the time, and no fool would have argued that the psx graphics processor was better than a GeForce DDR. However, since the developers didn't have to worry about their users having 5 different types of processors and graphics cards with varying amounts of memory and RAM, they could really squeeze all the power out of that little box and do some amazing things with it. The same thing applies to the ps2 (and I don't think developers have even begun to squeeze all the power they can out of it).
However, all this is irrelevant to the current thread of conversation because we're talking about graphics workstations and development, not what the finished product can look like. No real developer here or in Japan has EVER developed real games on a ps2 or psx (remember the Yarooze?). No, they used high-powered computers because those machines could render things in real time as they were being developed much faster than the game consoles could. Even assuming that the console COULD render faster, there's a huge software hurdle. There's an awesome amount of development tools for computers that no one is going to take the time to reproduce on a ps2. Maya, Lightwave, 3d Studio Max, etc., etc.
So, I would say in conclusion that yes linux on the ps2 is cool and would be fun to tinker with, but it certainly doesn't make it a graphics workstation or even a serious development platform.
Why do you think everyone has been talking about Windoz users, etc. all this time? We ARE talking about the stupid Code Red virus! It's a given that that's what's started this whole thing.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall that IIS is installed by default in Win2000. Is it in NT (I don't remember)? If it's not, then why is this worm such a problem? Most people who would be intelligent enough to find the option and install a web server SHOULD be intelligent enough to download a patch for it a month after it has come out, right? Or do we just have a bunch of dumb OEM's out there who installed IIS on all these computers they sold to dumb users? Seems fishy...
Slashdot Mirror
Windows DOES back up the registry at every successful reboot (at least XP does). It also backs it up every time a software program or driver is installed.
The cryptic voodoo I struggle to keep up with is Samba and Linux itself. Setting up networking, even advanced domain stuff, in Windows is very easy in comparison. Hence books like this one.
I don't mean to troll, but one of Linux's biggest problems from a usability point of view is that there is no central place where configuration information is stored (aka the "hated" registry in Windows). It's supposed to end up in
I think we would all be better off if the Linux community would work on fixing usability problems and making Linux more unified instead of continually adding new features. And if that sounds like many criticisms of Microsoft you've heard, then so be it.
Haha. Right. The setting up part will make you pull out your hair in consernation. One of the downfalls of Samba and Linux in general is that, while it is customizeable and extendable in the extreme, this customization and extension is not down in a very elegant or universal way and so it is very difficult to set up and make work correctly. Hence the plethora of Linux books that spend chapters discussing the most simple tasks, such as making a sound card work (see previous slashdoted article on Linux and soundcards).
that on a page about interface design that the text in the contents bar of the web page is overflowing out of the bar? This seems like a rather poor interface design standard to me...
I am currently running post XP RC2 that came out last Wednesday and trust me when I say that Java is very easy to get. Whenever you access a page that needs Java an IE dialog box appears which asks, "Would you like to download the Java Virtual Machine?" and you say "Install" and it goes automatically and gets that good old crappy MS JVM implementation and autoinstalls it for you.
I personally don't think that not having a JVM is going to deter XP users in the least from running applets in Java and if it's a server side app or something that's installed from a CD then it's not even an issue as Sun or IBM's newest JVMs can be installed.
The fact that Sony is currently 'evaluating' whether or not it is profitable to release the system doesn't seem like a very good sign in its favor. In fact I tend to think that this is probably vaporware and importing a japanese ps2 and development kit is as close as you'll get to Linux on PS2 (or at least the official Sony Linux; what others do is up to them!).
Traditionally in the videogame business, there have been many products that were released only in Japan, including both hardware and games. Usually the companies cited economic reasons for not bringing the products over here (they didn't they would sell well).
I agree. As I understand it, X was not originally designed to be a desktop GUI environment for a single machine anyway, but rather to serve other computers.
The current trend of trying to turn X into the next Windows does not seem like an extremely profitable one and it certainly wouldn't work well in an environment with limited RAM and single application needs like a ps2-turned-development-machine would be.
Sorry about that. I accidentally posted as html instead of plain old text, hence it has no line breaks. My bad.
he, he. Okay, I would like to see a link to prove that all of that fits in a meg of ram. Maybe you can "save" it in that amount of memory on a memory stick, but that doesn't mean that's how much the game is using while you're playing it. Secondly, the reason that developers can do such amazing things with consoles is that they have a unified development platform. There were games on the original playstation that were as good and better than the crop of pc games at the time, and no fool would have argued that the psx graphics processor was better than a GeForce DDR. However, since the developers didn't have to worry about their users having 5 different types of processors and graphics cards with varying amounts of memory and RAM, they could really squeeze all the power out of that little box and do some amazing things with it. The same thing applies to the ps2 (and I don't think developers have even begun to squeeze all the power they can out of it). However, all this is irrelevant to the current thread of conversation because we're talking about graphics workstations and development, not what the finished product can look like. No real developer here or in Japan has EVER developed real games on a ps2 or psx (remember the Yarooze?). No, they used high-powered computers because those machines could render things in real time as they were being developed much faster than the game consoles could. Even assuming that the console COULD render faster, there's a huge software hurdle. There's an awesome amount of development tools for computers that no one is going to take the time to reproduce on a ps2. Maya, Lightwave, 3d Studio Max, etc., etc. So, I would say in conclusion that yes linux on the ps2 is cool and would be fun to tinker with, but it certainly doesn't make it a graphics workstation or even a serious development platform.
Why do you think everyone has been talking about Windoz users, etc. all this time? We ARE talking about the stupid Code Red virus! It's a given that that's what's started this whole thing.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall that IIS is installed by default in Win2000. Is it in NT (I don't remember)? If it's not, then why is this worm such a problem? Most people who would be intelligent enough to find the option and install a web server SHOULD be intelligent enough to download a patch for it a month after it has come out, right? Or do we just have a bunch of dumb OEM's out there who installed IIS on all these computers they sold to dumb users? Seems fishy...