They should bring back the pizzabox mac. On the low end, you have to buy a big, clunky, monitor-included thing. If you want a "component" system, you have to buy a tower, which is big and costs much moolah.
If they sold a cheaper no-monitor system, people who already have monitors for their PCs could slip in a Mac instead.
Almost nothing you said on that post is actually true. I can switch from 8 o 16 to 24 to 32 bit depth, and change refresh rate and desktop size, without rebooting or restarting any applications. In Windows.
You still fail to understand that lots of people think this is a nice thing. Who cares about "a few seconds of blank screen?" No one is complaining about that. We're not asking for some Apple Genie-type morphing from the small size to the large size, or whatever.
Perhaps more attacks on linux could be occuring because it's more likely to succeed?
Anything is possible, even if not it's not probable. It could also be a result of Linux displacing windows in the server space. If there's 100 attacks/second, and windows' market share falls by 2% at the same time the Linux market share increases by 2%, then there will be a decrease in the number of attacks on Windows, and an increase in the number of attacks on Linux. If this trend continues, then it logically follows that there will be no more Windows servers at some point in the future.
Which are more successful? The attacks on Windows machines, or the attacks on Linux machines?
Maybe the attacks on Windows are falling off, because there's enough back doors already. Between Microsoft and Kazaa, I'd say things are good-to-go, from a back-door point of view.
If all the apps I'm running are GUI apps, and since I'm trying to use a projector this is likely to be the case, then restarting X and all the apps is inconsequentially better than rebooting the whole machine.
Besides, one other nice feature of Winders is that it will ask "does this display setting work," and then revert if you don't answer YES. On X, the equivalent solution is to switch to a console, re-edit XF86config-4, (or not -4, depending), switch back to X, ctral-alt-backspace and hope.
"Changing RES":) When you first set up X, select every resolution available to you at the highest color depth. Maybe someone should make an app where the "increase res" and "Decrease res" buttons hit the damn key combo for us. We could make it pretty.
It doesn't change the side of the desktop, which is actually what people who remark about this want. What good is a little window on a large virtual desktop? What kind of interface design is hiding large sections of the screen from the user?
You can have multiple monitors defined in your XFree86Config file, and since X v4 detects hardware at startup time, changing monitors should not be difficult (disclaimer: I've never done this so I may be completely wrong).
This "solution" isn't very good. Why should I have to restart all of my apps to change displays?
"You have changed monitors. Please restart for these changes to take effect." This is what we've been making fun of Windows for for years.
People like 0x0d0a seem to think that's acceptable, apparently simply because it's X and Unix. The attitude is, "if you don't know how to handle every obscure option required to do what should be simple things, then you're a moron -- go back to Windows."
I can do all the things that have been suggested. I've used, administered and programmed Linux and other forms of Unix for more than a decade.
The point is, it's stupid to think that a hard-to-use system is somehow a good thing. It's unproductive, elistist, and boneheaded.
Let's say I want to connect my laptop to an LCD projector that supports only 800x600 display, but the laptop is normally configured for its native resolution, which is 1600x1200.
Yeah, I can crtl-alt-whichamafuckle until I get the right res, and hopefully the refresh rate is acceptable. But now, I have to be careful about banging the mouse against the side of the viewable area, to avoid shifting my presentation off-screen. I also have to manually, carefully, size and position windows to make them as large as possible on the projector display.
Pain in the ass. It's much better to just change the size of the desktop, and click "maximize."
Just because you don't get it, doesn't mean it's not a problem.
Keith Packard is even working on the problem, with his R&R extension.
Just like Ford authorizing or forbidding use of the specific replacement tires for their vehicles, except this would be like Ford turning off your car if you have not used authorized tires.
Konq does look better than Mozilla. The version of Konq in KDE 3.0 is slooow, though. Slower than Mozilla. I have an Athlon 600, 256MB of RAM. Amazingly, Mozilla opens new windows faster than Konq, and seems to use less memory. I remember when the opposite was true.
It's hard to believe how sucky their first source control system was. When was CVS available? It's not perfect, but at least it has branching.
Re:his X11 claims are completely bogus
on
A Linux User Goes Back
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Just yesterday, Mozilla 1.0.0 hosed X 4.2.0 on ATI (Radeon) hardware. It was font-related, I think. First, xfs began consuming 98% of CPU, and X bloated up to 350MB. I have a physical 256 MB in the machine. Then, xfs crashed, mozilla crashed, etc.
switch to terminal,/sbin/service restart xfs (it won/t get restarted by anything else), look for errors, ctrl-alt-backspace horked X session, log in, and hope it doesn't happen again.
So, yeah, this was pretty much an X problem.
The whole multi-window application thing bothers me on X. On Windows or Mac, a dialog for an app stays in from of the app. If I focus the app, the dialog comes to the front. On X, it doesn't. I have to hunt for the dialog. This is annyoing, for instance, with The Gimp. Or pop-up dialog boxes in Nautilus.
I think the best solution is MacOSX's slide-down "dialog sheets" (or whatever they're called).
Libertarians are not anarchists. They're for government, but just the smallest government possible that still protects citizens from force and fraud. So, yes, they are "about freedom" and against excessive government regulation, but not all government regulation. In fact, they are explicitly for some government regulation, but only to prevent and punish force and fraud -- not to make sure you don't eat too much fried food, or other social-engineering pap. Think of Libertarianism as standing up for your right to be left alone.
Slashdot Mirror
They should bring back the pizzabox mac. On the low end, you have to buy a big, clunky, monitor-included thing. If you want a "component" system, you have to buy a tower, which is big and costs much moolah.
If they sold a cheaper no-monitor system, people who already have monitors for their PCs could slip in a Mac instead.
What? The bug fixes cost HOW MUCH? How many times do I have to buy this damned OS?
Oh, please. Real is not "stunning," and their software is annoying.
I think it's pretty funny that the only message in the July mailing list archive for Road Runner is from that spam-bitch, "Christine Hall."
2 002-July/thread.html
List:
http://lists.codefactory.se/pipermail/roadrunner/
(codefactory is the company working on GtkHTML and Mr. Project, btw).
Boo. Hoo.
Perhaps the doctor should look in that same database...
Almost nothing you said on that post is actually true. I can switch from 8 o 16 to 24 to 32 bit depth, and change refresh rate and desktop size, without rebooting or restarting any applications. In Windows.
You still fail to understand that lots of people think this is a nice thing. Who cares about "a few seconds of blank screen?" No one is complaining about that. We're not asking for some Apple Genie-type morphing from the small size to the large size, or whatever.
I think that Crap-Free Independent Music Labels would be a good idea.
Perhaps more attacks on linux could be occuring because it's more likely to succeed?
Anything is possible, even if not it's not probable. It could also be a result of Linux displacing windows in the server space. If there's 100 attacks/second, and windows' market share falls by 2% at the same time the Linux market share increases by 2%, then there will be a decrease in the number of attacks on Windows, and an increase in the number of attacks on Linux.
If this trend continues, then it logically follows that there will be no more Windows servers at some point in the future.
Which are more successful? The attacks on Windows machines, or the attacks on Linux machines?
Maybe the attacks on Windows are falling off, because there's enough back doors already. Between Microsoft and Kazaa, I'd say things are good-to-go, from a back-door point of view.
If all the apps I'm running are GUI apps, and since I'm trying to use a projector this is likely to be the case, then restarting X and all the apps is inconsequentially better than rebooting the whole machine.
Besides, one other nice feature of Winders is that it will ask "does this display setting work," and then revert if you don't answer YES. On X, the equivalent solution is to switch to a console, re-edit XF86config-4, (or not -4, depending), switch back to X, ctral-alt-backspace and hope.
Windows doesn't make me restart the GUI to change displays. X does. That's the stupid part.
"Changing RES":) When you first set up X, select every resolution available to you at the highest color depth. Maybe someone should make an app where the "increase res" and "Decrease res" buttons hit the damn key combo for us. We could make it pretty.
It doesn't change the side of the desktop, which is actually what people who remark about this want. What good is a little window on a large virtual desktop? What kind of interface design is hiding large sections of the screen from the user?
You can have multiple monitors defined in your XFree86Config file, and since X v4 detects hardware at startup time, changing monitors should not be difficult (disclaimer: I've never done this so I may be completely wrong).
This "solution" isn't very good. Why should I have to restart all of my apps to change displays?
"You have changed monitors. Please restart for these changes to take effect." This is what we've been making fun of Windows for for years.
People like 0x0d0a seem to think that's acceptable, apparently simply because it's X and Unix. The attitude is, "if you don't know how to handle every obscure option required to do what should be simple things, then you're a moron -- go back to Windows."
I can do all the things that have been suggested. I've used, administered and programmed Linux and other forms of Unix for more than a decade.
The point is, it's stupid to think that a hard-to-use system is somehow a good thing. It's unproductive, elistist, and boneheaded.
That's stupid.
> The Ximian Setup Tools
Uh-huh. Not even Ximian is shipping that... I wish they would!
Let's say I want to connect my laptop to an LCD projector that supports only 800x600 display, but the laptop is normally configured for its native resolution, which is 1600x1200.
Yeah, I can crtl-alt-whichamafuckle until I get the right res, and hopefully the refresh rate is acceptable. But now, I have to be careful about banging the mouse against the side of the viewable area, to avoid shifting my presentation off-screen. I also have to manually, carefully, size and position windows to make them as large as possible on the projector display.
Pain in the ass. It's much better to just change the size of the desktop, and click "maximize."
Just because you don't get it, doesn't mean it's not a problem.
Keith Packard is even working on the problem, with his R&R extension.
You must have gotten the student-price ADC membership. The other ones are a bit more pricey.
http://developer.apple.com/membership/descripti
Just like Ford authorizing or forbidding use of the specific replacement tires for their vehicles, except this would be like Ford turning off your car if you have not used authorized tires.
Stay in view! Agents will be there to 'assist' you shortly!
</haha>
Konq does look better than Mozilla. The version of Konq in KDE 3.0 is slooow, though. Slower than Mozilla. I have an Athlon 600, 256MB of RAM. Amazingly, Mozilla opens new windows faster than Konq, and seems to use less memory. I remember when the opposite was true.
Why does RedHat have it running by default?
Also, AFAIK, using XFS means that font-handling won't tie up the single-process X server.
It's hard to believe how sucky their first source control system was. When was CVS available? It's not perfect, but at least it has branching.
Just yesterday, Mozilla 1.0.0 hosed X 4.2.0 on ATI (Radeon) hardware. It was font-related, I think. First, xfs began consuming 98% of CPU, and X bloated up to 350MB. I have a physical 256 MB in the machine. Then, xfs crashed, mozilla crashed, etc.
switch to terminal,
So, yeah, this was pretty much an X problem.
The whole multi-window application thing bothers me on X. On Windows or Mac, a dialog for an app stays in from of the app. If I focus the app, the dialog comes to the front. On X, it doesn't. I have to hunt for the dialog. This is annyoing, for instance, with The Gimp. Or pop-up dialog boxes in Nautilus.
I think the best solution is MacOSX's slide-down "dialog sheets" (or whatever they're called).
I assume they're "on the list," now.
Libertarians are not anarchists. They're for government, but just the smallest government possible that still protects citizens from force and fraud. So, yes, they are "about freedom" and against excessive government regulation, but not all government regulation. In fact, they are explicitly for some government regulation, but only to prevent and punish force and fraud -- not to make sure you don't eat too much fried food, or other social-engineering pap. Think of Libertarianism as standing up for your right to be left alone.
I like your analogy, about snakehandlers