Sounds like a great reason to stick with XP to me.
I hate to be anti-change but let's not remove all the good features, add some DRM crud and call it an 'upgrade'. Who is Microsoft kidding? And they probably want us to *pay* for the privledge.
So then this "Synaptic Package Manager"... does it come with Debian, or is it something else I have to install. And if I have to install it, how do I install it and still be able to run it again (back to the same problem)?
You will probably need to install Synaptic via another package manager like kpackage or through the command line in Debian:
apt-get -t unstable synaptic
Once that is complete then you can install whatever packages you like through the Synaptic GUI interface. Yes, you can use Synaptic with other distros but only apt-get has 14,000 packages.
If you are a home user then I suggest you configure Synaptic to use the unstable binaries as that is the fastest way to get Gnome 2.8
For those that require more stabilty but somewhat new applications then they can set Synaptic to default to the testing binaries.
For those that are ultra conservative and don't mind running Gnome 2.2 or something they can use the stable binaries.
So then, even in Debian, you have to do an "apt-get" via the command line? You can't just go to a web site, download software, and install it? You have to type in "apt-get", then whatever the code for the program you're trying to install?
Well no, I don't have the patience to open a shell and type apt-get -t unstable packname. That's why a like Synaptic Package Manager. I can search for packages, install packages, upgrade packages, downgrade packages, remove packages and all the good stuff with the click of a mouse. It's kind of like Windows Update on steroids. Although invoking the name of a Microsoft product will probably leave a bad taste in your mouth. Sorry.
Microsoft did it to themselves when they announced an end to development for Internet Explorer.
When otherwise loyal tech-heads heard that MSIE 6.01 would be the final standalone version of Internet Explorer they decided to look for something that wasn't 'doomed'.
http://news.com.com/2100-1032_3-1011859.html?tag=f d_top
So why did Microsoft make such a claim? Arrogance. That had 90% of the browser market.
Microsoft has since recognized their mistake:
http://developers.slashdot.org/developers/04/06/20/1740256.shtml?tid=109&tid=113&tid=126&tid=185&tid =187&tid=95
I'm not sure if Gnome handles this or not, but I was curious if the newest Gnome handles shortcuts properly. In the latest incarnations of Mandrake and SUSE, when you install a program, it simply disappears
Yes, that's a distro thing. If you install Firefox through the installer you get nothing. I gather that the Firefox installer is not smart enough to figure out what your default desktop environment is.
What I can tell you, however, is that Debian's apt-get does an excellent job of creating menus for all applications that you install via apt-get. Sometimes the applications appear in the 'normal' Gnome menus but they seem to always appear under the Debian submenu (in KDE, Gnome, Fluxbox, whatever). It won't build icons for XFce, however.
It is set in the 30s and yet we know this didn't happen. There isn't too many examples of SciFi movies that are set in the past.
There's not too many people alive today that remember the 1930s all that well. I'd wager that a big percentage of them don't like SciFi as a genre. I'd also worry that there isn't too many theatres in 'walker' distance of an old-folks home.
I just can't imagine that this would be commercially viable. But who knows, I would never have guessed that people would buy half the things on eBay either...
Mozilla Firefox is the future. They might as well base things around that now. I think even the Gnome team will abandon Epiphany development eventually. It is rather redundant, IMO.
Combine the older mod with the joystick and you'll have the coolest thing since 1986.
That is assuming that you've been in a coma since then.
I was 14 once, it was enough...
Actually you misunderstand the situation. Fox News is not allowed in Canada not because of its right-wing viewpoint but because of its lack of Canadian content. A Canadian company would not be prevented from saying the exact same things as O'Reilly. Fox News was blocked by the CRTC because Fox chose not to adapt to Canadian content restrictions. All they'd need to do is interview someone from Alberta once in a while and include a few more diatribes against French Canadians.
Failing that, they could just have O'Reilly hold a hockey stick and wear a toque during his monologues.
Canadians must be protected from American culture, lest our own culture would wither away. And that would be a trajedy for Rita MacNeil. Who would buy her music?
Be flexable and look around. Redhat or Gentoo or something might be better choices.
Your post made a certain amount of sense until I got to the bottom and read that you suggested Gentoo as a more appropriate distro for corporate use.
Debian would be my first choice for (small) corporate use where there is no service contract in place. If the company has IBM kit and a related contract then they might as well choose a distro listed on this page:
http://www-1.ibm.com/linux/ (namely Red Hat, SUSE or TurboLinux)
For now, Debian is tied to their heavily patched xFree86 4.3
They have stated that they will not move to x.org until the modular version is available. Apparently it would take a lot of work to modify assumptions made in the apt-get respositories and they don't feel that the current release of x.org justifies the effort. Debian does acknowledge, however, that x.org is the future.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-x/2004/05/msg0043 1. html
I am making the assumption the x.org's X11R6.8 is still a part of the monolithic tree.
More information here: http://lists.debian.org/debian-x/2004/06/ms g00084. html
I certainly wouldn't list Eliphany's ability to bounce back from a crash as it's number one feature. That seems rather pessimistic.
You're also complaining about the speed of Firefox 0.8? Remember that optimizing for speed is the last thing that the coders concentrate on. I'd expect that the imminent 0.9 release will pretty much lock down the feature set and then they'll optimize the code before they release 1.0
Mozilla's Firefox is still at 0.8 (well, let me check my watch, it's about to go to 0.9) and thus it is still a work in progress that has yet to reach its 1.0 milestone. IMO, it already blows all the other open-source browsers out of the water. Even at this point, I'm prepared to declare it the open-source winner. Let's not bother developing open-source alternatives like Epiphany (or Galleon or Konqeror or whatever else).
Gnome's programmers that have been working on Epiphany should be redirected to some other function and let FireFox 1.x get bundled with Gnome 2.8. Gnome doesn't need to compete with Firefox because they will concentrate on besting MSIE and Opera (and I don't think they're particularly concerned with besting Epiphany at the moment anyway).
Linux has enough duplication as it is. Let's try and pick some winners from the crowd and go with it to some logical conclusion. I'd love to keep Gnome as the full desktop-environment UI and merge XFce and Fluxbox together for the alternate, low-resource UI.
Okay, perhaps I have a bit of an autocratic streak in me. Deal with it!
The hardware should be fine, you need to find out if there is software support.
Assuming that you have an Macintosh that supports IDE (and you have room for an internal drive) then you want to check with Toast to see if the drive is supported in their software.
If Google started charging tomorrow, suppose it's $5 a month, would I lose respect for them and would I pay for it?
I am in the mindset that I pay for bandwidth and not content. I consider my C$40/month for unlimited high speed access enough to get everything (within reason) on the internet.
If Google were to start charging for use then I would switch to a free search engine even if it was not as good.
The same logic applies to greeting cards. If there is a cool service that is free then great, maybe I'll send an e-card. If that service starts to charge tomorrow (even if it's relatively cheap) then say goodbye to me.
Am I cheap? Maybe you would consider me that. But if I were really cheap then I'd use a 56k modem. Obviously I'm willing to part with a certain amount of money but you have to prove that there really is value. Is Google twice as good as the next search engine? Is an e-card that much better than an email with a cute attachment picture?
While it is true that w2k licensed for 2 CPUs will "see" 4 CPUs when two SMT Xeon's are installed, Windows XP has supposedly been fixed in this regard. I would guess that it reads the CPUid to find out if there are known SMT CPUs in use.
The problem? Windows XP Professional maxes out at 2 CPUs. There is no WinXP Server, Advanced Server or Datacenter to support additional processors (virtual or otherwise).
So your maximum power under XP Pro will be 2 SMT Xeons or 4 virtual CPUs.
The next server release of Windows (.NET?) will be designed for known SMT CPUs like XP so here is when you could load up a rediculous number of SMT CPUs and go nuts.
You lot should all realize that these CPUs will be rediculously expensive and server boards that support more than 2 SMT CPUs are also prohibitavely expensive so don't expect a 4 SMT (8 virtual) system playing Quake or Max Payne anytime soon. Actually even a regular Xeon motherboard is expensive enough, never mind a 4 CPU one.
Why would IBM have any interest whatsoever in breaking up Microsoft? IBM needs for there to be a strong desktop presence in order to drive its core business (enterprise servers), and Microsoft does that better than anybody.
IBM doesn't really care about it's desktop presence. It's been a money losing area for them for years and they have recently decided to stop manufacturing their own desktop computers. You will continue to see IBM-branded desktop computers but they will be made by somebody else.
Slashdot Mirror
That's it, i'm preparing my "Will hack for food" sign right now.
Yes, politics and journalism are inextricably linked.
The reporters personal political beliefs will inevitably influence their interpretation of the facts.
There are very few facts out there that somebody won't contest in some manor.
Even optimists and pessimists interpret facts differently.
I told those environmentalists that if you gave us enough time we'd find something useful about the hole in the ozone layer.
Oh god, another file system.
Let's lock all the file system developers in a room for a few days and let the fight it out. The last one standing wins.
Sounds like a great reason to stick with XP to me.
I hate to be anti-change but let's not remove all the good features, add some DRM crud and call it an 'upgrade'. Who is Microsoft kidding? And they probably want us to *pay* for the privledge.
If,
NT4 is 4%
Windows 2000 is 8%
and XP is 12%
then what, pray tell is the failure rate of Windows ME?
I'm afraid to find out.
apt-get -t unstable synaptic
Once that is complete then you can install whatever packages you like through the Synaptic GUI interface. Yes, you can use Synaptic with other distros but only apt-get has 14,000 packages.
If you are a home user then I suggest you configure Synaptic to use the unstable binaries as that is the fastest way to get Gnome 2.8
For those that require more stabilty but somewhat new applications then they can set Synaptic to default to the testing binaries.
For those that are ultra conservative and don't mind running Gnome 2.2 or something they can use the stable binaries.
Microsoft did it to themselves when they announced an end to development for Internet Explorer.
f d_top
0 /1740256.shtml?tid=109&tid=113&tid=126&tid=185&tid =187&tid=95
When otherwise loyal tech-heads heard that MSIE 6.01 would be the final standalone version of Internet Explorer they decided to look for something that wasn't 'doomed'.
http://news.com.com/2100-1032_3-1011859.html?tag=
So why did Microsoft make such a claim? Arrogance. That had 90% of the browser market.
Microsoft has since recognized their mistake:
http://developers.slashdot.org/developers/04/06/2
Yes, that's a distro thing. If you install Firefox through the installer you get nothing. I gather that the Firefox installer is not smart enough to figure out what your default desktop environment is.
What I can tell you, however, is that Debian's apt-get does an excellent job of creating menus for all applications that you install via apt-get. Sometimes the applications appear in the 'normal' Gnome menus but they seem to always appear under the Debian submenu (in KDE, Gnome, Fluxbox, whatever). It won't build icons for XFce, however.
Can I run QuickTransit(TM) on my Phantom gaming console? And if so, will it play Duke Nukem Forever?
It is set in the 30s and yet we know this didn't happen. There isn't too many examples of SciFi movies that are set in the past. There's not too many people alive today that remember the 1930s all that well. I'd wager that a big percentage of them don't like SciFi as a genre. I'd also worry that there isn't too many theatres in 'walker' distance of an old-folks home. I just can't imagine that this would be commercially viable. But who knows, I would never have guessed that people would buy half the things on eBay either...
Mozilla Firefox is the future. They might as well base things around that now. I think even the Gnome team will abandon Epiphany development eventually. It is rather redundant, IMO.
Combine the older mod with the joystick and you'll have the coolest thing since 1986. That is assuming that you've been in a coma since then. I was 14 once, it was enough...
Actually you misunderstand the situation. Fox News is not allowed in Canada not because of its right-wing viewpoint but because of its lack of Canadian content. A Canadian company would not be prevented from saying the exact same things as O'Reilly. Fox News was blocked by the CRTC because Fox chose not to adapt to Canadian content restrictions. All they'd need to do is interview someone from Alberta once in a while and include a few more diatribes against French Canadians.
Failing that, they could just have O'Reilly hold a hockey stick and wear a toque during his monologues.
Canadians must be protected from American culture, lest our own culture would wither away. And that would be a trajedy for Rita MacNeil. Who would buy her music?
Star Trek doesn't need to die, just Wesley Crusher.
(sorry Wil, I know you could use the work but they'll just edit you out again anyway).
This election hasn't been about issues anyway. It's about Bush during 9/11 or Kerry during Vietnam.
Debian would be my first choice for (small) corporate use where there is no service contract in place. If the company has IBM kit and a related contract then they might as well choose a distro listed on this page: http://www-1.ibm.com/linux/ (namely Red Hat, SUSE or TurboLinux)
For now, Debian is tied to their heavily patched xFree86 4.3
3 1. html
s g00084. html
They have stated that they will not move to x.org until the modular version is available. Apparently it would take a lot of work to modify assumptions made in the apt-get respositories and they don't feel that the current release of x.org justifies the effort. Debian does acknowledge, however, that x.org is the future.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-x/2004/05/msg004
I am making the assumption the x.org's X11R6.8 is still a part of the monolithic tree.
More information here:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-x/2004/06/m
I certainly wouldn't list Eliphany's ability to bounce back from a crash as it's number one feature. That seems rather pessimistic.
You're also complaining about the speed of Firefox 0.8? Remember that optimizing for speed is the last thing that the coders concentrate on. I'd expect that the imminent 0.9 release will pretty much lock down the feature set and then they'll optimize the code before they release 1.0
Mozilla's Firefox is still at 0.8 (well, let me check my watch, it's about to go to 0.9) and thus it is still a work in progress that has yet to reach its 1.0 milestone. IMO, it already blows all the other open-source browsers out of the water. Even at this point, I'm prepared to declare it the open-source winner. Let's not bother developing open-source alternatives like Epiphany (or Galleon or Konqeror or whatever else).
Gnome's programmers that have been working on Epiphany should be redirected to some other function and let FireFox 1.x get bundled with Gnome 2.8. Gnome doesn't need to compete with Firefox because they will concentrate on besting MSIE and Opera (and I don't think they're particularly concerned with besting Epiphany at the moment anyway).
Linux has enough duplication as it is. Let's try and pick some winners from the crowd and go with it to some logical conclusion. I'd love to keep Gnome as the full desktop-environment UI and merge XFce and Fluxbox together for the alternate, low-resource UI.
Okay, perhaps I have a bit of an autocratic streak in me. Deal with it!
The hardware should be fine, you need to find out if there is software support. Assuming that you have an Macintosh that supports IDE (and you have room for an internal drive) then you want to check with Toast to see if the drive is supported in their software.
If Google started charging tomorrow, suppose it's $5 a month, would I lose respect for them and would I pay for it?
I am in the mindset that I pay for bandwidth and not content. I consider my C$40/month for unlimited high speed access enough to get everything (within reason) on the internet.
If Google were to start charging for use then I would switch to a free search engine even if it was not as good.
The same logic applies to greeting cards. If there is a cool service that is free then great, maybe I'll send an e-card. If that service starts to charge tomorrow (even if it's relatively cheap) then say goodbye to me.
Am I cheap? Maybe you would consider me that. But if I were really cheap then I'd use a 56k modem. Obviously I'm willing to part with a certain amount of money but you have to prove that there really is value. Is Google twice as good as the next search engine? Is an e-card that much better than an email with a cute attachment picture?
While it is true that w2k licensed for 2 CPUs will "see" 4 CPUs when two SMT Xeon's are installed, Windows XP has supposedly been fixed in this regard. I would guess that it reads the CPUid to find out if there are known SMT CPUs in use.
The problem? Windows XP Professional maxes out at 2 CPUs. There is no WinXP Server, Advanced Server or Datacenter to support additional processors (virtual or otherwise).
So your maximum power under XP Pro will be 2 SMT Xeons or 4 virtual CPUs.
The next server release of Windows (.NET?) will be designed for known SMT CPUs like XP so here is when you could load up a rediculous number of SMT CPUs and go nuts.
You lot should all realize that these CPUs will be rediculously expensive and server boards that support more than 2 SMT CPUs are also prohibitavely expensive so don't expect a 4 SMT (8 virtual) system playing Quake or Max Payne anytime soon. Actually even a regular Xeon motherboard is expensive enough, never mind a 4 CPU one.
Why would IBM have any interest whatsoever in breaking up Microsoft? IBM needs for there to be a strong desktop presence in order to drive its core business (enterprise servers), and Microsoft does that better than anybody. IBM doesn't really care about it's desktop presence. It's been a money losing area for them for years and they have recently decided to stop manufacturing their own desktop computers. You will continue to see IBM-branded desktop computers but they will be made by somebody else.