but I did run linux 2.2 and 2.4 for a year or two, and in my experience (did you hear that, AC garbage?) I had to patch every few weeks to keep crackers out.
then I went back to NetBSD (the first Unix I had ever used, on a Mac SE/30) and never looked back. it does not crash, period, unless there is a hardware failure or power outage. Linux crashed infrequently, but NetBSD has crashed once for me in a combined six years of constant use. NetBSD runs what I need it to run (for both desktop and server jobs), and once the machine is set up and running, I don't need to touch it.
it makes me wonder why anyone wastes so much of their time in the Linux environment.
In this case, "-1, Flamebait" can be read as "The truth hurts, don't it?"
My experience with Linux is the same as the parent poster's: patching, patching, patching if you're up-to-date with the latest 2.x version, or running a kernel from 3 years ago if you prefer stability to tinkering.
I'll take a slight speed hit (oh no! only 294 frames per second!) if it means not having to use an OS which finds a way to annoy me every 20 seconds (Windows), or an OS straight out of 1997 (Linux, etc). OS X is a revolution in usability.
Even though we have better-than-32K resolution in the Analog photos in our passports, I bet that at least half The Slashdot readership's back hair is standing on end.
Maybe this is a privacy concern. Maybe. Especially if You're concerned about automatic face recognition and such.
Anyone could create a device which could match your face from a Scan of your passport photo. And your retinas can even be Scanned while you're in line. What's the big deal here?
Know why Linux will fail on the desktop?
on
Linux on the Desktop
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Look at workalike apps that run on Windows. They can't even make it. You expect users to adopt a new OS *AND* utilities? Get real.
Sorry, but that's just bullshit. Look up the numbers. N billion CD's were sold last year. M million (not billion) songs were downloaded. N >> M. Ergo, most people buy their music; most people don't steal it.
You are correct. I will rephrase: "Most people likely to buy music online have used file-sharing services to obtain mp3s."
Yes, but the problem with that is that a "iTunes-like PC solution" is going to disappear without a trace in a few months when Apple ships the actual iTunes for Windows.
The AC is right. Why is this at -1?
Most people don't steal their music, dude. Most people know right from wrong. The people who use Kazaa are in the TINY minority compared to the people who actually pay for what they take.
The AC is wrong. Most people steal their music, currently because they are forced to. iTunes offers superior digital copies to mp3 (even the best rips) for a small, One-Click(tm) price. Roxio/Pressplay's "solution" will clunk like a square-wheeled bike, mark my words.
Slashdot Mirror
The following people were goatse'd today:
in CompuServe Graphics Interchange Format:
212.127.132.92, 129.187.184.18, 64.221.37.115, 213.200.152.102, 66.207.129.194, 207.88.78.2, 131.123.78.1,
24.199.119.235, 62.121.38.71, 128.147.164.50, 207.250.61.51, 63.98.74.118, 66.158.132.127, 209.250.144.10,
152.3.148.169, 68.208.53.223, 128.54.231.194, 68.58.90.212, 204.101.228.105, 192.31.106.36, 208.42.100.65,
216.126.84.98, 62.46.225.162, 143.127.131.4, 81.152.200.0, 63.229.133.217, 209.132.105.160, 62.180.53.220,
199.88.114.1, 63.205.12.93, 62.212.105.30, 198.109.28.231, 69.44.125.212, 66.153.56.194, 129.63.145.58 (3 times),
208.144.114.232, 199.111.231.38, 65.214.200.30, 24.80.59.70, 195.64.93.22, 219.95.62.162, 65.215.61.207,
209.133.49.85, 216.91.92.7, 65.167.23.134, 208.203.175.11, 157.254.98.202, 63.121.18.131, 68.161.105.200,
24.164.209.84, 203.33.165.14, 24.114.110.25, 128.54.148.34, 65.94.2.14, 204.209.24.2, 64.215.47.178,
64.236.221.6, 195.38.4.3 (9 times), 67.96.195.18, 206.245.139.170, 24.169.73.171, 131.215.82.72, 208.254.97.250,
64.252.130.6, 204.156.0.10, 209.172.11.56, 158.130.51.22, 165.88.3.129, 207.246.150.59, 68.232.129.225,
155.212.181.189, 129.59.129.98, 207.63.37.61, 24.147.220.41, 199.68.77.225, 66.45.123.112, 82.41.96.13,
160.39.114.106, 63.137.144.2, 69.136.164.244, 66.168.58.39, 207.190.251.196, 81.6.243.25, 128.211.159.15 (13 times),
212.32.166.92, 63.105.26.58, 209.46.88.3, 66.61.18.249, 213.224.83.136, 208.42.18.135, 217.162.0.22,
204.17.142.106, 209.251.114.236, 206.126.163.20
Total: 94 unique hosts
in Portable Document Format:
62.195.82.67, 216.1.6.2, 157.254.98.202, 12.215.109.87, 64.136.26.235, 213.76.227.220, 68.161.105.200,
12.22.103.227, 128.147.164.50, 128.54.148.34, 199.10.151.139, 63.98.74.118, 195.38.4.3, 192.18.240.4,
198.185.18.207, 68.208.53.223, 216.64.128.42, 24.169.73.171, 204.124.92.254, 206.245.139.170, 62.252.224.5,
212.121.135.227, 130.39.111.208, 208.186.96.8, 217.233.33.86, 81.152.200.0, 64.235.101.178, 62.180.53.220,
68.232.129.225, 129.59.129.98, 213.253.40.173, 66.152.29.2, 193.77.153.149, 65.33.241.230, 24.98.248.48,
212.32.166.92, 134.226.1.114, 66.57.71.142, 132.250.113.168, 65.120.194.67, 66.61.18.249, 130.231.167.206,
62.101.102.226, 213.224.83.136, 216.120.224.150, 217.162.0.22, 65.215.61.207, 209.251.114.236, 24.215.177.177,
24.59.96.16
Total: 50 unique hosts
Because gavinroy.com is getting slow and the story is not even posted
to non-subscribers yet, here is a mirror of the threat and response letters:
threat (gif): http://nva.ftso.org/sco/sco_threat.gif
response (pdf): http://nva.ftso.org/sco/SCO%20Response.pdf
Tasers and thorazine are for American citizens only. Foreigners get pentothal and a straight razor.
Linux is not ready for the desktop. They are not even close.
Not now. Not ever.
Don't mod me down. Let time prove me wrong.
document it? no, I never documented it.
but I did run linux 2.2 and 2.4 for a year or two, and in my experience (did you hear that, AC garbage?) I had to patch every few weeks to keep crackers out.
then I went back to NetBSD (the first Unix I had ever used, on a Mac SE/30) and never looked back. it does not crash, period, unless there is a hardware failure or power outage. Linux crashed infrequently, but NetBSD has crashed once for me in a combined six years of constant use. NetBSD runs what I need it to run (for both desktop and server jobs), and once the machine is set up and running, I don't need to touch it.
it makes me wonder why anyone wastes so much of their time in the Linux environment.
In this case, "-1, Flamebait" can be read as "The truth hurts, don't it?"
My experience with Linux is the same as the parent poster's: patching, patching, patching if you're up-to-date with the latest 2.x version, or running a kernel from 3 years ago if you prefer stability to tinkering.
you wish... and so do I. so do most OS X users for that matter. who wouldn't like to make a $300 computer feel like a Mac?
alas, it's Jobs' way or the highway...
rock-solid, sure... Linux has been stone stable since before 1997. i'm talking about look and feel.
every year it's, "Linux on the desktop has made huge improvements in the last year," but it never quite gets there.
use OS X for a week or two and you'll see what i mean.
"case closed"? are you that fag from the Relapse board?
p.s. hi DK!
I'll take a slight speed hit (oh no! only 294 frames per second!) if it means not having to use an OS which finds a way to annoy me every 20 seconds (Windows), or an OS straight out of 1997 (Linux, etc). OS X is a revolution in usability.
Agreed. There room for creative problem solving though.
(define (.sig) (cons 'my (list 'other 'car 'is 'a 'cdr)))
...)) to (list 'my ...). of course your method is valid, but (list) alone is undoubtedly clearer.
:)
you could shorten (cons 'my (list
you could implement (list) like so:
(define (list . elts) (list2 elts))
(define (list2 l)
(if (eq? l #f)
#f
(cons (car l) (list2 (cdr l)))))
so you see that (cons 'my (list 'other 'car 'is 'a 'cdr)) is just the first run through (list 'my 'other 'car 'is 'a 'cdr).
of course (list) could be written (define (list . elts) elts) but that's cheating.
Added naive RGB CMYK conversion routines [Sven]
This will go nicely with their naive user interface.
Which means it's not a Linux application, it's a Windows application... So what?
so it might not suck
but not in this case.
not "poor", just different. TMTOWTDI.
the BSD License.
Here come all the knee-jerk rally-behind-Microsoft comments.
And still make it in.
Offhand, every male in Israel comes to mind.
Even though we have better-than-32K resolution in the
Analog photos in our passports, I bet that at least half
The Slashdot readership's back hair is standing on end.
Maybe this is a privacy concern. Maybe. Especially if
You're concerned about automatic face recognition and such.
Anyone could create a device which could match your face from a
Scan of your passport photo. And your retinas can even be
Scanned while you're in line. What's the big deal here?
Look at workalike apps that run on Windows. They can't even make it. You expect users to adopt a new OS *AND* utilities? Get real.
I smell armageddon.
put your shoes back on.
Sorry, but that's just bullshit. Look up the numbers. N billion CD's were sold last year. M million (not billion) songs were downloaded. N >> M. Ergo, most people buy their music; most people don't steal it.
You are correct. I will rephrase: "Most people likely to buy music online have used file-sharing services to obtain mp3s."
Yes, but the problem with that is that a "iTunes-like PC solution" is going to disappear without a trace in a few months when Apple ships the actual iTunes for Windows.
The AC is right. Why is this at -1?
Most people don't steal their music, dude. Most people know right from wrong. The people who use Kazaa are in the TINY minority compared to the people who actually pay for what they take.
The AC is wrong. Most people steal their music, currently because they are forced to. iTunes offers superior digital copies to mp3 (even the best rips) for a small, One-Click(tm) price. Roxio/Pressplay's "solution" will clunk like a square-wheeled bike, mark my words.
They're both dead thanks to the Apple Music Store.
But let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers