K12LTSP is having problems with their new alpha for exactly this reason. Disabling SELinux seems to solve the problems, but nobody really knows yet what else it affects.
Reposted from another topic (my post, originally) because it seems appropriate. Don't mod me up, though, because the original post already got several points.
I think this unity argument is just propoganda that we've heard for years coming to rest as truth. Really, before Windows, there were a multitude of DOS variants, operating as the launcher for programs written directly to the metal, for the most part. MS owned this one from early on with IBM, but DR-DOS might've had a chance. These were all effectively neutral as far as the program went.
Then we had the window managers which appeared on top of DOS. There were several, including the fledgling Windows, but I don't remember them, because my Model I had died, and I didn't own a non-DOS computer for several years after that. Anyway, MS didn't own that part for a long time, and programs were still pretty much DOS.
But no matter what, it wouldn't have stayed that way. Toolkits other than MS versions would have appeared. We could have seen DOS cores with competing window managers and toolkits, and things would look pretty much like they do now on Linux.
And, just like now, computer manufacturers would be integrating these components looking for consistent appearance and behavior, leading to standardized APIs, most likely.
So, I don't think that MS brought unity to the computer industry, because I think that it was an inevitable result of market pressure. MS was simply in the right place at the right time (because of their contracts with OEMs) and used the right (aggressive) business tactics to own the whole thing.
We can argue whether this is all true or not, and certainly whether the result under MS is better or worse than what I've laid out, but I do believe that, if MS had not taken the desktop, someone (probably several someones) would've done it in MS's place, and we'd have unity in the form of standard APIs.
I want to debate your claim about unity, but first I'd like to say that if using a C64 was like driving a moped, then I don't want to know what you think my use of a Model I through to 1987 represents.
Anyway, I think this unity argument is just propoganda that we've heard for years coming to rest as truth. Really, before Windows, there were a multitude of DOS variants, operating as the launcher for programs written directly to the metal, for the most part. MS owned this one from early on with IBM, but DR-DOS might've had a chance. These were all effectively neutral as far as the program went.
Then we had the window managers which appeared on top of DOS. There were several, including the fledgling Windows, but I don't remember them, because my Model I had died, and I didn't own a non-DOS computer for several years after that. Anyway, MS didn't own that part for a long time, and programs were still pretty much DOS.
But no matter what, it wouldn't have stayed that way. Toolkits other than MS versions would have appeared. We could have seen DOS cores with competing window managers and toolkits, and things would look pretty much like they do now on Linux.
And, just like now, computer manufacturers would be integrating these components looking for consistent appearance and behavior, leading to standardized APIs, most likely.
So, I don't think that MS brought unity to the computer industry, because I think that it was an inevitable result of market pressure. MS was simply in the right place at the right time (because of their contracts with OEMs) and used the right (aggressive) business tactics to own the whole thing.
We can argue whether this is all true or not, and certainly whether the result under MS is better or worse than what I've laid out, but I do believe that, if MS had not taken the desktop, someone (probably several someones) would've done it in MS's place, and we'd have unity in the form of standard APIs.
Nobody ever complained about the calculator for the same reason nobody complained about the default sound player. It is not powerful enough to compete against any real, for-sale product out there. It also doesn't use a proprietary formula method which you must license from MS. It uses the good old standard math that we all (except those Polish folk) use and love.
If you love something, the last thing you want to try to do is do it for a living.
That's funny, because it's the opposite of what my father always said. He' a pilot, and has been for forty plus years. He's flown fighters (back when they were real fighters), helicopters, and commercial planes of all sizes. He may not have liked every minute of his work, but he's always considered himself reasonably happy and looks back on his life with no regrets about his choice of career.
I used to call it the "subjective pay" concept. If I walk into work and walk out twelve hours later feeling like only six passed by because I was having a good time at it, I made more per (subjective) hour than if I worked only eight hours but watched the clock for twelve of that.
I can't speak for any other languages, but the Thai, which rests below 50%, is most likely held back because Gnome is the standard desktop for LinuxTLE, and has been virtually completely translated. Jumping over into KDE, though, I rarely see anything that hasn't, so I wonder if the stats are up to date or if the LinuxTLE team have passed back their changes yet.
I'm sorry if that came across as agressive. It wasn't meant that way. I really was curious, since everyone was talking about how great LinuxTLE was doing, where they were getting their facts. It could be true and I'm just not seeing it in my corner of Thailand. It is a great OS, though, and very consumer ready (mplayer and xine play everything, the Thai apps all work really well, and the plugins for Moz are all preinstalled).
Who said that uptake of LinuxTLE is increasing? I mean, there are about ten books out on it, but they don't appear to be moving, and I am the only person I know in my area who uses it.
It is a very strong product, and I had an opportunity to apply for a job on their team (Mr. Choke, when is the announcement coming out?), but I have watched the number of Linux computers sold in Carrefour drop from ten to zero over the last six months, so I doubt it's growing greatly.
In fact, LinuxTLE 5.5 has been out for a month or so now, and I haven't seen any cover articles in the local magazines like there were for 4.0, 4.1, and 5.0. I feel the news of LinuxTLE's rise to power has been exaggerated.
Now there's an awesome idea! The game manufacturer puts RH and SUSE rpms, a deb, and a tgz on the disk (mostly scripts) along with Winex so that their game works out of the box and is installed simply and easily on most platforms. Minimal fuss for the developer and no fuss for the player.
So, what if the Winex guys get a game working perfectly, put it onto a special installation disk along with the Winex version and config that it works best with (with the publisher's agreement, of course), and sell the disk... Would you pay for it? I see that as a viable model for both Winex and Linux games.
Something like the Mandrake Sims game a few years back...
I recently substituted at a school for almost a month, and the teachers would sit around BSing during lunch. Well, I brought in a copy of Knoppix to use OOo with (since I am much faster with it than MSOffice;), but booted into it one lunch period to play Galaga. The next day, all the teachers were bugging me to teach them how to boot it so that they could play, for the most part, KBounce.
Almost all, anyway. One guy started bringing in his laptop so that he could play NWN...
One of them asked me, "Why would anyone want to use anything but Windows? Why did they bother to make this?"
So how is one a troll pointing out a simple fact that you can still install other programs if you so choose?
I was only half-jokingly calling you a troll. I suspected (and still do) that you know that your reply completely side-stepped the comment you were replying to, No, since they do not use some form of lock-in mechanism to prevent the users for using other products.
You answer was Nor does WMP. I can still install iTunes, Winamp or whatever else. And iTunes has the same DRM for media that you buy from their store.
Microsoft's format (which you can't deny is becoming another de facto standard) needs to be licensed from them. Once it becomes the standard for 95% of media on the internet, I expect that licensing charge to sky-rocket.
In short, they are using their monopoly on the desktop to secure (yet another) monopoly in a different market. Your "choice" will disappear as soon as they decide to take it away from you.
Now, if by default support and use open formats, then I'm all for MS bundling whatever it wants, because it can't leverage anything.
I can, however, use another program to read the text files that I've created with Notepad, use my extremely simple math formulae on another, competing calculator program ( heck, I can even port that sucker over to Linux with little trouble ), or set my new taskbar clock to the same time by using the system time, like I always have, but I cannot use that DRM enable.wmp file with just any media player: thus, no lock-in and another troll bites the dust.
And another one's gone, and another one's gone...
Oh, sorry.;(
Based on thesetwo posts, he's apparently talking about some form of autism, either Kanner's or Asperger's, and from this one, I am willing to bet that he is a she, though hecould be gay, but the way the post is written comparing men to women makes me believe otherwise.
I'm intrigued because, although my sister is autistic, I didn't know anything about these two types until I read her/his posting history.
I'm looking at this site for more info.
Geez, and I was thinking Nehemiah core from VIA. How much do the Pent Ms cost now? I haven't yet seen them in my country (of course, neither have I seen the Epia...) because the Thai IT stores are entirely buzzword compliant.
Well, since, in my original post, I provided three links attempting to "debunk deconstructionism," I think that I satisfy your criteria. In fact, saying " If there is no tool that can be used to determine it, there is no way to disprove the theory that is being used to determine it" puts you right in the biblical scholars' section of faith. I look for methods with verifiable results, which this tool does not provide at all, and to attempt to bring a tool which offers nothing but opinions into a scientific discussion is useless. Perhaps worse than useless.
I made no strawman argument, but merely pointed out that no tool currently exists to do this, and that at this time, we can't tell much of anything with any certainty. I will not and did not make the statement that this can never be. I'm through wasting my time with this.
I didn't make any argument except to say that deconstruction shouldn't be counted on, which I followed by saying that there is really no tool which can establish with any certainty when and by whom a certain historical document was created and/or edited. I don't see that I contradicted myself at all.
Enlighten me, please.
Slashdot Mirror
K12LTSP is having problems with their new alpha for exactly this reason. Disabling SELinux seems to solve the problems, but nobody really knows yet what else it affects.
I want to debate your claim about unity, but first I'd like to say that if using a C64 was like driving a moped, then I don't want to know what you think my use of a Model I through to 1987 represents.
Anyway, I think this unity argument is just propoganda that we've heard for years coming to rest as truth. Really, before Windows, there were a multitude of DOS variants, operating as the launcher for programs written directly to the metal, for the most part. MS owned this one from early on with IBM, but DR-DOS might've had a chance. These were all effectively neutral as far as the program went.
Then we had the window managers which appeared on top of DOS. There were several, including the fledgling Windows, but I don't remember them, because my Model I had died, and I didn't own a non-DOS computer for several years after that. Anyway, MS didn't own that part for a long time, and programs were still pretty much DOS.
But no matter what, it wouldn't have stayed that way. Toolkits other than MS versions would have appeared. We could have seen DOS cores with competing window managers and toolkits, and things would look pretty much like they do now on Linux.
And, just like now, computer manufacturers would be integrating these components looking for consistent appearance and behavior, leading to standardized APIs, most likely.
So, I don't think that MS brought unity to the computer industry, because I think that it was an inevitable result of market pressure. MS was simply in the right place at the right time (because of their contracts with OEMs) and used the right (aggressive) business tactics to own the whole thing.
We can argue whether this is all true or not, and certainly whether the result under MS is better or worse than what I've laid out, but I do believe that, if MS had not taken the desktop, someone (probably several someones) would've done it in MS's place, and we'd have unity in the form of standard APIs.
Nobody ever complained about the calculator for the same reason nobody complained about the default sound player. It is not powerful enough to compete against any real, for-sale product out there. It also doesn't use a proprietary formula method which you must license from MS. It uses the good old standard math that we all (except those Polish folk) use and love.
If you love something, the last thing you want to try to do is do it for a living.
That's funny, because it's the opposite of what my father always said. He' a pilot, and has been for forty plus years. He's flown fighters (back when they were real fighters), helicopters, and commercial planes of all sizes. He may not have liked every minute of his work, but he's always considered himself reasonably happy and looks back on his life with no regrets about his choice of career.
I used to call it the "subjective pay" concept. If I walk into work and walk out twelve hours later feeling like only six passed by because I was having a good time at it, I made more per (subjective) hour than if I worked only eight hours but watched the clock for twelve of that.
So, unless those people are developers, you put their home directories on a non-executable partition.
I can't speak for any other languages, but the Thai, which rests below 50%, is most likely held back because Gnome is the standard desktop for LinuxTLE, and has been virtually completely translated. Jumping over into KDE, though, I rarely see anything that hasn't, so I wonder if the stats are up to date or if the LinuxTLE team have passed back their changes yet.
I'm sorry if that came across as agressive. It wasn't meant that way. I really was curious, since everyone was talking about how great LinuxTLE was doing, where they were getting their facts. It could be true and I'm just not seeing it in my corner of Thailand. It is a great OS, though, and very consumer ready (mplayer and xine play everything, the Thai apps all work really well, and the plugins for Moz are all preinstalled).
Who said that uptake of LinuxTLE is increasing? I mean, there are about ten books out on it, but they don't appear to be moving, and I am the only person I know in my area who uses it.
It is a very strong product, and I had an opportunity to apply for a job on their team (Mr. Choke, when is the announcement coming out?), but I have watched the number of Linux computers sold in Carrefour drop from ten to zero over the last six months, so I doubt it's growing greatly.
In fact, LinuxTLE 5.5 has been out for a month or so now, and I haven't seen any cover articles in the local magazines like there were for 4.0, 4.1, and 5.0. I feel the news of LinuxTLE's rise to power has been exaggerated.
Now there's an awesome idea! The game manufacturer puts RH and SUSE rpms, a deb, and a tgz on the disk (mostly scripts) along with Winex so that their game works out of the box and is installed simply and easily on most platforms. Minimal fuss for the developer and no fuss for the player.
So, what if the Winex guys get a game working perfectly, put it onto a special installation disk along with the Winex version and config that it works best with (with the publisher's agreement, of course), and sell the disk... Would you pay for it? I see that as a viable model for both Winex and Linux games.
Something like the Mandrake Sims game a few years back...
Well, all I can say is that the graphics on my Tandy Model I rocked! Everything was fast and smooth at 40x80...
I recently substituted at a school for almost a month, and the teachers would sit around BSing during lunch. Well, I brought in a copy of Knoppix to use OOo with (since I am much faster with it than MSOffice;), but booted into it one lunch period to play Galaga. The next day, all the teachers were bugging me to teach them how to boot it so that they could play, for the most part, KBounce.
Almost all, anyway. One guy started bringing in his laptop so that he could play NWN...
One of them asked me, "Why would anyone want to use anything but Windows? Why did they bother to make this?"
So how is one a troll pointing out a simple fact that you can still install other programs if you so choose?
I was only half-jokingly calling you a troll. I suspected (and still do) that you know that your reply completely side-stepped the comment you were replying to,
No, since they do not use some form of lock-in mechanism to prevent the users for using other products.
You answer was
Nor does WMP. I can still install iTunes, Winamp or whatever else. And iTunes has the same DRM for media that you buy from their store.
Microsoft's format (which you can't deny is becoming another de facto standard) needs to be licensed from them. Once it becomes the standard for 95% of media on the internet, I expect that licensing charge to sky-rocket.
In short, they are using their monopoly on the desktop to secure (yet another) monopoly in a different market. Your "choice" will disappear as soon as they decide to take it away from you.
Now, if by default support and use open formats, then I'm all for MS bundling whatever it wants, because it can't leverage anything.
I can, however, use another program to read the text files that I've created with Notepad, use my extremely simple math formulae on another, competing calculator program ( heck, I can even port that sucker over to Linux with little trouble ), or set my new taskbar clock to the same time by using the system time, like I always have, but I cannot use that DRM enable .wmp file with just any media player: thus, no lock-in and another troll bites the dust. ;(
And another one's gone, and another one's gone...
Oh, sorry.
Based on these two posts, he's apparently talking about some form of autism, either Kanner's or Asperger's, and from this one, I am willing to bet that he is a she, though he could be gay, but the way the post is written comparing men to women makes me believe otherwise.
I'm intrigued because, although my sister is autistic, I didn't know anything about these two types until I read her/his posting history.
I'm looking at this site for more info.
Geez, and I was thinking Nehemiah core from VIA. How much do the Pent Ms cost now? I haven't yet seen them in my country (of course, neither have I seen the Epia...) because the Thai IT stores are entirely buzzword compliant.
We use it at my company and will soon be at an internet cafe I'll be opening, as well.
I gave them the finger... Does that count?
14"????
I'm not folding it in half for anybody!!!
OK, bad joke. Mod me down.
Heck, I'd make those dual P3's into thin-client servers and use the old P1-200s in the storage closet for the thin clients. Save a bundle that way!
Yeah, but then the Perl freaks would be modding the Python code down as trollish, or something..
Well, since, in my original post, I provided three links attempting to "debunk deconstructionism," I think that I satisfy your criteria. In fact, saying " If there is no tool that can be used to determine it, there is no way to disprove the theory that is being used to determine it" puts you right in the biblical scholars' section of faith. I look for methods with verifiable results, which this tool does not provide at all, and to attempt to bring a tool which offers nothing but opinions into a scientific discussion is useless. Perhaps worse than useless.
I made no strawman argument, but merely pointed out that no tool currently exists to do this, and that at this time, we can't tell much of anything with any certainty. I will not and did not make the statement that this can never be. I'm through wasting my time with this.
I didn't make any argument except to say that deconstruction shouldn't be counted on, which I followed by saying that there is really no tool which can establish with any certainty when and by whom a certain historical document was created and/or edited. I don't see that I contradicted myself at all.
Enlighten me, please.