PD source allows you more freedom(s) at the user end Nope. User's have the same rights with both.
At the authorship end, PD software gives you the right to piss your ideas away (or, to be more clear, write your brilliant code in obscurity while somebody else steals it and takes credit). GPL software provides motivation for improving the code by giving credit and takes away the freedom to steal.
Reading release notes is certainly among the things they rarely ever do, and so this hints at Ubuntu doing something wrong more than anything else. I think the real BIG hint is that there is a ? icon at the top of the screen that explains everything she was asked to do (maybe not flash install), why didn't she click on that? My guess, and it is a poor one, is that the ? icon looks like a program that is missing its icon and not like the help application that it is.
I should add that I love Linux and mostly use Ubuntu. I absolutely can not stand it when I have to help a Windows user. (Why do you have to click on something in order to scroll the window using the mouse wheel?) Anyway, I say this because user testing works. I would never have noticed the issues she noticed.
Good arguments, on both sides. I'll let you argue with yourself.
The fact remains that installing major packages targetted for one distribution on another distribution can be tricky at best. Hell, even trying to run packages on an older version of the SAME distribution is often hit and miss.
The question is, why would you do that when targeting say, the older version of the distribution, is adequate for most applications?
See what i changed there. Nice!
And God forbid you're running a Linux distribution from 2001 (as opposed to running an app from 2001).
If you're running a Linux distribution from 2001 with no service packs in 2008 you're going to have a lot bigger problems than running apps from a developer who doesn't know how to target his Linux applications for maximum compatibility.
Again, excellent points. Are you a lawyer? You argue both sides with excellent acumen.
What most commercial vendors end up doing is one of 3 things:
Statically link binaries
Include all the dependencies for the program
Build and test packages for all recent versions of all major Windows versions and service packs (often leaving users of minor HotFixes or special editions (MCE) to fend for themselves)
It woudl be awesome if all developers could produce unique builds for every major release of your favorite OS, but it just ain't going to happen. I've been running OS X Leopard since it came out and I don't think I'm running a single application that is targeted specifically for Leopard aside from the apps that came with it. The only reason Linux is even usable when you do a major upgrade is because nearly all the apps are upgraded at the same time.
Note: I especially like this part of your argument, "The only reason Linux is even usable when you do a major upgrade is because nearly all the apps are upgraded at the same time." That is a great point that should really be emphasized when talking to your Mac or Windows using friends. You go on to argue that it is unsustainable because there are just too many applications for Linux. Ahh, another refutation of an often cited negative of Linux. Remember? Linux isn't as good as these other OSes because it doesn't have very many applications.
There's almost no forward compatibility in Linux distributions. Fortunately, it is free to upgrade, but still...
And yet the end users rarely sees the issue on Windows.
Your argument here is so subtle, it is genius. Everybody knows that the most often cited Windows Vista complaint (after slownewss, DRM, lack of drivers, too many versions, etc.) is that many older applications don't run on it and some applications run on some versions of Vista and not on others. Brilliant!
I did RTFL, and for the fun of it decided to click on a few of the OS X vulnerabilities. The first 3 out of 4 I clicked on in December were for the Perl Compatible Regular Expression library. Each appeared to be a way of causing a crash, DOS, or remote execute when using patterns involving character classes. Why are these 3 unique vulnerabilities? My guess is because the vulnerabilities are dumps of the project's bug database.
According to the definitive source, "A rhetorical question typically ends in a question mark (?), but occasionally may end with an exclamation mark (!) or even a period (.) according to some writing style guides[citation needed]." Note both the word "typically" and the words "citation needed".
Your font sizes will be different with different printer drivers, different graphics drivers, different versions of Office, different versions of Windows.
Why any document that is slightly complex slightly off in open office.
So despite the fact the MS Office can't do it, apparently on simple documents, OpenOffice.org CAN reproduce the document exactly. That's cool!
.
<grammar level="nazi">Typically, questions are punctuated with question marks(?).</grammar>
OSX 2001 was garbage, even Mac users admit as much
If Apple releases a new revision each year that increments the version.1 each time. And, if apple increments the major version every 10 revisions, then it will be more than 19,000 years before OSX 2001 is released.
What type of hardware does it run on? Is this even a valid question?
The point of the article is this: If you'd like to play with cool eye candy now, you can, for free using Ubuntu Dapper. It's not the default setup, 'cause it's not stable, yet. Because it's not the default, you have to edit some config files. The normal install works, leaving you in fullscreen high-color beauty when it finishes. Windows leaves you staring at a 16 color 640x480 screen after the install with no network and a need to download the driver from the internet. Sweet!
Interesting note, Edgy Eft will use GLX by default and it'll still be released before Vista. Heck, Kickin' Kangaroo* will probably be released before Vista.
*Made that name up, but if Vista comes in April or later...
Slashdot Mirror
At the authorship end, PD software gives you the right to piss your ideas away (or, to be more clear, write your brilliant code in obscurity while somebody else steals it and takes credit). GPL software provides motivation for improving the code by giving credit and takes away the freedom to steal.
I'm OK with that.
I should add that I love Linux and mostly use Ubuntu. I absolutely can not stand it when I have to help a Windows user. (Why do you have to click on something in order to scroll the window using the mouse wheel?) Anyway, I say this because user testing works. I would never have noticed the issues she noticed.
I have a Pentium M 1.86Ghz running Gutsy and I got 6867 with last night's nightly. Full benchmark results:
Benchmark Results
See what i changed there. Nice!
Again, excellent points. Are you a lawyer? You argue both sides with excellent acumen.
Note: I especially like this part of your argument, "The only reason Linux is even usable when you do a major upgrade is because nearly all the apps are upgraded at the same time." That is a great point that should really be emphasized when talking to your Mac or Windows using friends. You go on to argue that it is unsustainable because there are just too many applications for Linux. Ahh, another refutation of an often cited negative of Linux. Remember? Linux isn't as good as these other OSes because it doesn't have very many applications.
Your argument here is so subtle, it is genius. Everybody knows that the most often cited Windows Vista complaint (after slownewss, DRM, lack of drivers, too many versions, etc.) is that many older applications don't run on it and some applications run on some versions of Vista and not on others. Brilliant!
I did RTFL, and for the fun of it decided to click on a few of the OS X vulnerabilities. The first 3 out of 4 I clicked on in December were for the Perl Compatible Regular Expression library. Each appeared to be a way of causing a crash, DOS, or remote execute when using patterns involving character classes. Why are these 3 unique vulnerabilities? My guess is because the vulnerabilities are dumps of the project's bug database.
Just my 5 second research into these results.
So, the post was right on target. Well, at least closer than you give it credit.
OSX 2001 was garbage, even Mac users admit as much
.1 each time. And, if apple increments the major version every 10 revisions, then it will be more than 19,000 years before OSX 2001 is released.
If Apple releases a new revision each year that increments the version
What type of hardware does it run on? Is this even a valid question?
Sigh.
Sigh.
The point of the article is this: If you'd like to play with cool eye candy now, you can, for free using Ubuntu Dapper. It's not the default setup, 'cause it's not stable, yet. Because it's not the default, you have to edit some config files. The normal install works, leaving you in fullscreen high-color beauty when it finishes. Windows leaves you staring at a 16 color 640x480 screen after the install with no network and a need to download the driver from the internet. Sweet!
Interesting note, Edgy Eft will use GLX by default and it'll still be released before Vista. Heck, Kickin' Kangaroo* will probably be released before Vista.
*Made that name up, but if Vista comes in April or later...
Frank Lloyd Wright
http://www.earthcomber.com/community/node/492
Northwestern University
http://www.earthcomber.com/community/node/125
LUGs
http://www.earthcomber.com/community/node/114
Then, take 'em with you.