Guess what happens if you try to install Windows on a machine with a preexisting OS: It WIPES OUT YOUR MBR, LOCKING YOU OUT OF YOUR CURRENT OS!!!111!!1. Windows must not be ready for the desktop! Why don't you complain about that?
Actually, windows warns you first, telling you you need to install to a seperate disk or partition and then if you don't that it will overwrite your current system. If you do install to a seperate disk or partition it then sets up the MBR so that you can choose which install you want to boot from. I know this as I have a PC with 2 windows installations on it. Coincidentaly the only time I've had a problem with the MBR was when I tried installing Linux for a brief time.
And your attitude is why Linux remains an also ran on home desktop systems. People don't want to fix it. They want it to work. Look at it this way the VAST majority of people who use computers don't know the slightest thing about programming and certainly less about where to begin to fix a problem like that. With windows and OS X they call Microsoft/Apple and they complain. The tech support guy provides them a solution and then passes it up to people who can do something about it that something needs to be done. Often it then gets fixed in the next release.
With linux on the other hand, there's no one to call. When they finaly do find people (like people on slashdot) who know something about this, the answer they get is "Fix it yourself and stop whining you lazy ass". Which is basicaly telling these people do learn a new skill, then become knowledgeable to know where to begin, and then actualy go through the process of fixing the problem.
In short, it's easier for them to go back to windows or OS X because that's what they were using the first time and it worked just fine for them. And linux remains an also ran. Untill the OSS comunity realizes that without OpenSource Tech Support(TM) with a team of dedicated people who are going to make things better for the average joe and not just contribute to their favorite project, Linux will remain off the home user's desktop and in 3rd place.
The point was, for the blind guy, he needed someone to help him just get it installed. Why is that again? If it CAME PRE INSTALLED ON HIS COMPUTER then he wouldn't have had that problem, once there he had enough to go on.
This is at best a stop gap solution and is ignoring the larger problem. The problem is not that dell doesn't preinstall because that only works until one has to reinstall / reformat / do anything out of the ordinary, the problem is that OSS developers are not doing this and then passing the buck saying it's someone else's responsibility. Something like this needs to be there REGARDLESS of whether Dell preinstalls or not.
Linux on the desktop, for sighted or blind, is going to continue to be an also ran until such a time as either large governments mandate choice and universal access, or humans become universally non greedy, and the latter I sincerely doubt is going to be happening anytime soon..
Not true and this is what I HATE hearing from OSS developers all the time. That it's someone else that needs to force linux onto the desktop to make it less of an "also ran". That is simply sticking your head in the sand and hoping the problem goes away. The plain and simple fact is that for linux to stop being an also ran the people developing it have to make it do that it's NOT an also ran. That's the name of the game when you're the underdog, be better than the standard and make people want to change. Forcing people to change by law is not going to win the day. When you force by law you always get the bare minimum.
OSS as a community needs to stop saying "if Dell would preinstall linux then it would be better" they need to make it better so Dell and their customers WANT linux preinstalled.
Or instead of making more laws and legislation and passing the buck to other people, the OSS comunity could add audio installation and disabled access to the linux installers?
Fixing the disability is not as easy as it sounds. Any one POTENTIAL solution can take years and years just to get to a true testing phase let alone a sellable phase, and then there's the actual cost of the fix for each person.
In the mean time, OSS developers (and developers in general) are in pissing contests over who can do X task.3 seconds faster than the competitor.
Yes the number needs to be on the card. One time at the retail store I worked at, the credit authorization system went down, and it wasn't on our end. That ment no credit cards could be processed electronicaly via either network or dialup. For a good half hour we had to process CCs manualy using the carbons. Without those numbers there would have been a lot of angry customers.
try the stuff at gunfacts.info (PDF format). Sure the site is by default biased but all of their facts are cited with sources and many come straight from the USJD
You know, I did some math on this once, and it was a while ago so I apologise if my numbers are slightly off but as I recall it went something like this.
If we take the US population and subtract out the number of people serving in the armed forces, and then took out all the people under 18 and over 65 and then cut that number in half and assumed they were armed we would have a considerable armed citizens force. It turned out that if none of the armed forces defected and only those people in the armed group of citizens fought and died at a rate of 100 citizens for every 1 armed forces member at the end of it all you would still have a few thousand armed civilians and all the rest of the people that you exluded. The numbers are far better than most people think.
Western nations need to remember that free expression does not cause harm.
Yet odly enough in the east, there were riots over mere cartoons.
I don't agree with this ruling in any way shape or form but to pretend that free expresion of idea's can not cause harm is ridiculous. The question is, is the harm intentional, and severe enough to warrant a restriction.
Mc Donalds, Starbucks, even Ford, have a special place in the heart of many Europeans as examples of pigopolists that trample with the notion of Europeaness.
And yet you're all still spending enough money to make it a profitable and worthwhile venture, which leads to the conclusion that no matter how trampling it is of Euopeaness it may be, consumerism still rules the day.
How does a plethora of distributions affect Dell choosing and supporting one of them? It doesn't. What keeps them from getting inundated with tech support calls regarding fifty different distros right now? Nothing. It's just "Sorry, we don't support that." How would selling and supporting a machine with distro-X on it change that? It wouldn't. Tech support calls for distro-Y just get "Sorry, we don't support that."
Because customers are fucking stupid. I don't mean your average dumbass stupid, I mean belly crawling gutter shit stupid. All the customer is going to know is that they have linux on their computer. As soon as they call in and here "sorry we don't support that distribution" they're going to be pissed because to the customer is Linux. It's not RedHat Linux, it's not Ubuntu Linux, it's not SuSE linux. The customer doesn't give a shit who made the distribution all they know is that it's Linux and dell sells boxes with linux and they want support.
Ask anyone who works in tech support how suprisingly common it is for people to not understand such simple concepts.
In this case, linux is on the vendor end and dell is on the client end. If the goal is to have a company start shipping hardware with linux installed already, then the company shipping the hardware is the client to the linux developers. In this senario the end users are irellevant except in so much as they want linux preinstalled on hardware.
One of the sections of the enlistment contract basicaly says the military can keep you as long as they deem nessesary. And it's not in legalese and it's not burried (it's like the 8th paragraph). If you can't be bothered to read your enlistment contract, well, that's too bad for you now isn't it?
But to take this closer to the port scanning analogy, you didn't climb the tree with binoculars specificaly to see said naked coed, rather you climbed the tree to see how far you could see and what you could see from the vantage point of that tree. The fact that in the process of looking around you happened to see a naked coed has nothing to do with the fact that your intent was not to see that particular naked coed.
Why do you assume that treating the internet like public (which it really is) automaticaly leads to government harrassment? Do the police harrass you every time you leave your house?
Sounds to me like you need to do more research. From the linked FAQ.
Q. There are many music players out there, what's different about yours? A. SoundBridge is the most compatible music player available, with built-in support for the most popular Windows and Macintosh audio libraries (see below). No need to install any software - just plug and play!
Only Roku SoundBridge includes:
Support for Windows Media Connect, Musicmatch, Windows Media Player, and Windows Media DRM 10 Direct, licensed iTunes integration A large bitmapped display Tubular industrial design Music visualizers AAC decode in the player
In other words, Apple wanted permission to use the source completely as they wished, so that they could stop other people from doing the same. The GPL has a clause that prevents them from doing this. If they keep the binary version of the program to themselves, then they don't have to comply with any of the GPL.
How does Apple using the NTFS source remove the rights of anyone else to use the NTFS source?
BSD and GPL have two very different, although similar, goals. The BSD license is best if you most want for your code to be used, in absolutely any way whatsoever. The GPL is best for ensuring your code remains free. Which you prefer is a very philosophical, and personal, choice, but neither is "selfish".
I never understood this. What part of the BSD license does not ensure that MY code remains free. As I look at it, once someone modifies / changes/derrives my code, it's no longer exclusively MY code and therefore does not have to be free. Furthermore, even if that remains my code, my code is still free because I provide it under BSD and people still have access to MY code, just not the my code that someone else has.
I've never understood this GPL argument. What does allowing Apple (or anyone) to use the code without GPLing their whole damn project or even releasing changes back to the world have to do with mankind's knowledge of your work? If your work belongs to mankind, Apple using it doesn't prevent mankind from using it. That's the whole beauty of open source, it's not scarce.
I never implied you were an idiot. I did imply that you were either lying or intentionaly editing or misleading in your story as "gunning it" and "avoiding rear-ending someone" are two very different and distinct actions.
I asked you to explain the situation, you refused.
I asked you to clarify your stance by providing a similar situation and asking what you think the cops should do there. You ignored it.
You ask me to take your one situation to suggest that all cops are ticket writing machines and deserve to be treated like assholes when they are doing their job, yet you give me no reason to.
Why again should I be trying to have a civilized discussion with you?
And I have no reason to believe you over my own personal (and numerous) experiences, especialy given that we've already demonstrated your story is inconsistant.
Slashdot Mirror
Guess what happens if you try to install Windows on a machine with a preexisting OS: It WIPES OUT YOUR MBR, LOCKING YOU OUT OF YOUR CURRENT OS!!!111!!1. Windows must not be ready for the desktop! Why don't you complain about that?
Actually, windows warns you first, telling you you need to install to a seperate disk or partition and then if you don't that it will overwrite your current system. If you do install to a seperate disk or partition it then sets up the MBR so that you can choose which install you want to boot from. I know this as I have a PC with 2 windows installations on it. Coincidentaly the only time I've had a problem with the MBR was when I tried installing Linux for a brief time.
And your attitude is why Linux remains an also ran on home desktop systems. People don't want to fix it. They want it to work. Look at it this way the VAST majority of people who use computers don't know the slightest thing about programming and certainly less about where to begin to fix a problem like that. With windows and OS X they call Microsoft/Apple and they complain. The tech support guy provides them a solution and then passes it up to people who can do something about it that something needs to be done. Often it then gets fixed in the next release.
With linux on the other hand, there's no one to call. When they finaly do find people (like people on slashdot) who know something about this, the answer they get is "Fix it yourself and stop whining you lazy ass". Which is basicaly telling these people do learn a new skill, then become knowledgeable to know where to begin, and then actualy go through the process of fixing the problem.
In short, it's easier for them to go back to windows or OS X because that's what they were using the first time and it worked just fine for them. And linux remains an also ran. Untill the OSS comunity realizes that without OpenSource Tech Support(TM) with a team of dedicated people who are going to make things better for the average joe and not just contribute to their favorite project, Linux will remain off the home user's desktop and in 3rd place.
The point was, for the blind guy, he needed someone to help him just get it installed. Why is that again? If it CAME PRE INSTALLED ON HIS COMPUTER then he wouldn't have had that problem, once there he had enough to go on.
This is at best a stop gap solution and is ignoring the larger problem. The problem is not that dell doesn't preinstall because that only works until one has to reinstall / reformat / do anything out of the ordinary, the problem is that OSS developers are not doing this and then passing the buck saying it's someone else's responsibility. Something like this needs to be there REGARDLESS of whether Dell preinstalls or not.
Linux on the desktop, for sighted or blind, is going to continue to be an also ran until such a time as either large governments mandate choice and universal access, or humans become universally non greedy, and the latter I sincerely doubt is going to be happening anytime soon..
Not true and this is what I HATE hearing from OSS developers all the time. That it's someone else that needs to force linux onto the desktop to make it less of an "also ran". That is simply sticking your head in the sand and hoping the problem goes away. The plain and simple fact is that for linux to stop being an also ran the people developing it have to make it do that it's NOT an also ran. That's the name of the game when you're the underdog, be better than the standard and make people want to change. Forcing people to change by law is not going to win the day. When you force by law you always get the bare minimum.
OSS as a community needs to stop saying "if Dell would preinstall linux then it would be better" they need to make it better so Dell and their customers WANT linux preinstalled.
Or instead of making more laws and legislation and passing the buck to other people, the OSS comunity could add audio installation and disabled access to the linux installers?
Fixing the disability is not as easy as it sounds. Any one POTENTIAL solution can take years and years just to get to a true testing phase let alone a sellable phase, and then there's the actual cost of the fix for each person.
.3 seconds faster than the competitor.
In the mean time, OSS developers (and developers in general) are in pissing contests over who can do X task
Thats what OS X has a built in screen reader for.
Yes the number needs to be on the card. One time at the retail store I worked at, the credit authorization system went down, and it wasn't on our end. That ment no credit cards could be processed electronicaly via either network or dialup. For a good half hour we had to process CCs manualy using the carbons. Without those numbers there would have been a lot of angry customers.
try the stuff at gunfacts.info (PDF format). Sure the site is by default biased but all of their facts are cited with sources and many come straight from the USJD
You know, I did some math on this once, and it was a while ago so I apologise if my numbers are slightly off but as I recall it went something like this.
If we take the US population and subtract out the number of people serving in the armed forces, and then took out all the people under 18 and over 65 and then cut that number in half and assumed they were armed we would have a considerable armed citizens force. It turned out that if none of the armed forces defected and only those people in the armed group of citizens fought and died at a rate of 100 citizens for every 1 armed forces member at the end of it all you would still have a few thousand armed civilians and all the rest of the people that you exluded. The numbers are far better than most people think.
Western nations need to remember that free expression does not cause harm.
Yet odly enough in the east, there were riots over mere cartoons.
I don't agree with this ruling in any way shape or form but to pretend that free expresion of idea's can not cause harm is ridiculous. The question is, is the harm intentional, and severe enough to warrant a restriction.
Mc Donalds, Starbucks, even Ford, have a special place in the heart of many Europeans as examples of pigopolists that trample with the notion of Europeaness.
And yet you're all still spending enough money to make it a profitable and worthwhile venture, which leads to the conclusion that no matter how trampling it is of Euopeaness it may be, consumerism still rules the day.
No, but their relative who knows just enough to be dangerous might. I've seen it happen.
How does a plethora of distributions affect Dell choosing and supporting one of them? It doesn't. What keeps them from getting inundated with tech support calls regarding fifty different distros right now? Nothing. It's just "Sorry, we don't support that." How would selling and supporting a machine with distro-X on it change that? It wouldn't. Tech support calls for distro-Y just get "Sorry, we don't support that."
Because customers are fucking stupid. I don't mean your average dumbass stupid, I mean belly crawling gutter shit stupid. All the customer is going to know is that they have linux on their computer. As soon as they call in and here "sorry we don't support that distribution" they're going to be pissed because to the customer is Linux. It's not RedHat Linux, it's not Ubuntu Linux, it's not SuSE linux. The customer doesn't give a shit who made the distribution all they know is that it's Linux and dell sells boxes with linux and they want support.
Ask anyone who works in tech support how suprisingly common it is for people to not understand such simple concepts.
In this case, linux is on the vendor end and dell is on the client end. If the goal is to have a company start shipping hardware with linux installed already, then the company shipping the hardware is the client to the linux developers. In this senario the end users are irellevant except in so much as they want linux preinstalled on hardware.
One of the sections of the enlistment contract basicaly says the military can keep you as long as they deem nessesary. And it's not in legalese and it's not burried (it's like the 8th paragraph). If you can't be bothered to read your enlistment contract, well, that's too bad for you now isn't it?
But to take this closer to the port scanning analogy, you didn't climb the tree with binoculars specificaly to see said naked coed, rather you climbed the tree to see how far you could see and what you could see from the vantage point of that tree. The fact that in the process of looking around you happened to see a naked coed has nothing to do with the fact that your intent was not to see that particular naked coed.
Why do you assume that treating the internet like public (which it really is) automaticaly leads to government harrassment? Do the police harrass you every time you leave your house?
Sounds to me like you need to do more research. From the linked FAQ.
Q. There are many music players out there, what's different about yours?
A. SoundBridge is the most compatible music player available, with built-in support for the most popular Windows and Macintosh audio libraries (see below). No need to install any software - just plug and play!
Only Roku SoundBridge includes:
Support for Windows Media Connect, Musicmatch, Windows Media Player, and Windows Media DRM 10
Direct, licensed iTunes integration
A large bitmapped display
Tubular industrial design
Music visualizers
AAC decode in the player
That assumes that the value of my code is directly derrived or at lease very proportional too it's interoperability with the company's modified code.
An NTFS driver should not have such a problem.
Furthermore, if the source from the company is closed, then my code has utility and value in that it's open which is the point in the first place.
In other words, Apple wanted permission to use the source completely as they wished, so that they could stop other people from doing the same. The GPL has a clause that prevents them from doing this. If they keep the binary version of the program to themselves, then they don't have to comply with any of the GPL.
How does Apple using the NTFS source remove the rights of anyone else to use the NTFS source?
BSD and GPL have two very different, although similar, goals. The BSD license is best if you most want for your code to be used, in absolutely any way whatsoever. The GPL is best for ensuring your code remains free. Which you prefer is a very philosophical, and personal, choice, but neither is "selfish".
/derrives my code, it's no longer exclusively MY code and therefore does not have to be free. Furthermore, even if that remains my code, my code is still free because I provide it under BSD and people still have access to MY code, just not the my code that someone else has.
I never understood this. What part of the BSD license does not ensure that MY code remains free. As I look at it, once someone modifies / changes
I've never understood this GPL argument. What does allowing Apple (or anyone) to use the code without GPLing their whole damn project or even releasing changes back to the world have to do with mankind's knowledge of your work? If your work belongs to mankind, Apple using it doesn't prevent mankind from using it. That's the whole beauty of open source, it's not scarce.
Actualy, to win a libel suit, you need to prove damages.
I never implied you were an idiot. I did imply that you were either lying or intentionaly editing or misleading in your story as "gunning it" and "avoiding rear-ending someone" are two very different and distinct actions.
I asked you to explain the situation, you refused.
I asked you to clarify your stance by providing a similar situation and asking what you think the cops should do there. You ignored it.
You ask me to take your one situation to suggest that all cops are ticket writing machines and deserve to be treated like assholes when they are doing their job, yet you give me no reason to.
Why again should I be trying to have a civilized discussion with you?
And I have no reason to believe you over my own personal (and numerous) experiences, especialy given that we've already demonstrated your story is inconsistant.