Seriously, though, I do believe that not everything Linus says should be doctrine and I'm sure he's been proven wrong a few times. However, this whole Linux thing is still his. I know, I know, it belongs to the world and the GPL and the one-true-communist society...but at the heart of it, Linux belongs to Linus. If nothing else, give the man his due respect.
Oh, and there's no use posting anonymously, Mr. Stallman -- yer just pissy 'cause nobody wants to hear you sing your hacker song anymore.:)
The argument against backporting is that a lot of wasted time/effort goes to something that could've been taken care of by upgrading to the latest/greatest kernel.
The practicality here is that not everyone needs to upgrade to the latest kernel. Some production systems are stable enough as is and don't need the upgrade. Some may even become unstable as they get upgraded. Thus if some features are needed from the newer versions, backporting allows people to utilize just the features they need.
All part of that Open Source GPL Free as in Freedom thing. Even for those who consider it a waste of time and effort, those are things that the GPL entitles anyone to put effort into. Those who are adamantly against such wasted manpower should probably consider visiting SourceForge for a coronary.
Having been a DSL user for a few years now, I can't personally imagine going back to a slow dial-up connection. The same can't be said about people going the other way, though.
For a great majority of users, having a computer is enough of an issue as it is. It's a mysterious machine to them, and plugging in extra cash without knowing the benefits isn't an option.
Even if they know and understand the speed benefits, it's often not enough to convince the low-end users to switch. So the pictures download noticeably faster...then what? Unless they're downloading pr0n or swapping major files, it's not that big a deal to them. Unfortunately, this is probably the same crowd that won't wait for Windows Updates to download because it's too much of a hassle.
If you want to put the Linux vs Microsoft parallel to this situation, there's an analogy waiting to be used. People who are used to dialup will not move to the unfamiliar unless absolutely convinced that it's better, faster, and more stable. There's a lot of Windows users out there who are afraid to jump operating systems simply because they'd rather stick to the familiar.
Same thing with dialup vs. broadband. Some people will willingly suffer through low speeds because they don't believe they need anything better.
Of course the analogy breaks the moment pricing is mentioned.:)
Re:Yomega yoyos rock too, at a much better price
on
Extreme Yo-Yoing
·
· Score: 1
Um, you must've been REALLY good with the yoyo so as to keep the bullies at bay. Otherwise, you poor, poor soul. Your rocking-the-baby or walking-the-dog must've been followed swiftly by the ultimate-wedgie or the ultrageek-beatdown.
I work at a city library with machines sponsored by the B&M Gates Learning Foundation. To pimp Free Software may incur the wrath of Redmond for an already underfunded library. We're already a frickin' MS Office infomercial as it is.
I do, however, try to make sure people know and understand the costs of MS Software as well as the benefits of Open Source/Free Software. I recommend OpenOffice for those who don't want to shell out a fortune for word processing. I tell people about Mozilla Firefox and describe the benefits it has.
I also have handouts with links to AVG Anti-Virus, Ad-Aware, and Zone Alarm. Not Open Source but "free as in beer."
To offer CD's could become a support nightmare unless you pull a "Try at your own risk" thing. Last thing a library needs are irate patrons because they borked their machines trying to use/install software YOU supplied.
If you are to do so anyway, go with OSS for Windows, first. OpenOffice, Firefox, GIMP. Then maybe the free-as-in-beer stuff I mentioned earlier for antivirus, anti-spyware, and firewalling. Then there's other stuff like Knoppix and bootable game CD's (America's Army?).
In the end, there are quite a few considerations to think about when offering software from a library. You'll have political issues, can lose some private funding/sponsorships, and even have irate patrons who mistake your goodwill for tech-support-for-life.
One of the irritating things I got to hear at the library was that when a student asked about BSODs and rebooting, the rest of the class said that it's a normal thing, and to get used to it. I had to tell them otherwise, and even then, they weren't fully convinced that instability isn't natural.
Hopefully with stuff like free software cd's, and the knoppixes of the world, people will find that there are alternatives to MS. Maybe they'll even see its simplicity, stability, and practicality.
But with Open Source, you at least have a chance to backport or code for compatibility because the code is open.
With proprietary software, that option isn't even there. If MS decided to cut support for a certain version of MS Word, for example, your company could very well be fscked. I get enough of that from MS Works to MS Word as it is.
Worse yet, if a lesser known proprietary company whom your business uses goes 404, your investment is screwed...and the chances of you porting your data onto a different system is next to nil.
The "freedoms" associated with Open Source help ensure that you're not locked down and helpless. Backwards-compatibility may be an issue, but at least it's got possible solutions. Not so in the closed-source world.
Someone once jokingly said that a broader userbase will result in less security. Thus the best way to secure software is to make sure nobody uses it.
The main issue here is that the simpler an interface is, the less the user has to understand about the entire system. IF the system can sustain itself with minimal administration, it can survive.
The problem lies in making interfaces so easy that "mouse clicking solutions experts" can be lulled into thinking they've secured everything just because they've clicked on a few icons. If they understand the system fully, usability is a good thing. If you're a clueless user, a usable pointy-clicky interface can be a very dangerous thing that'll bork your system faster than you can su to root and type "rm -rf/"
C'mon, isn't this like using an aimbot in a FPS? Force feedback steering wheel, visual cues on the windshield -- sounds like a really posh way to play Gran Turisimo to me.
I suppose if it helps decrease the number of car accidents out there, I should be all for it. However, I've found out that as much as we rave about stupid computer users, there's at least an equal amount of stupid car drivers out there. The big difference is that if you bork your machine, you inconvenience yourself and maybe a few others who get viruses over e-mail. You bork something with your car, lives are potentially at risk.
Driving with these error-correcting systems turned on may make people rely on them too much...like a moron admin that thinks he's 100% safe after installing a firewall. This is good only if they hammer the point home that people should not rely on this to keep them safe.
Good day, eh! This Linux thing is a very good thing for the economy and all that. However the only penguin we acknowledge comes from Pittsburg and we don't like that Mario Lemieux guy all that much. If it sucks as bad as that hockey team did this season, I wouldn't stake my reputation on that penguin eh.
How 'bout we make our own brand called Maple Leaf Linux or Red Toque. Or maybe we can call it Gretzky Linux and charge 99 Canadian for it.
Heck in Edmonton the best one-two combination was Gretzky to Kurri -- The Great One and a great Finnish guy. Gretzky did his best work with the aid of a Finnish product! So is Linux good? You bet! I give it a hat trick rating.
The popularity issue can be countered with the Apache vs. IIS deal where Apache's stability and security (and reaction to vulnerability) is much better. Just because something is popular doesn't mean it's not as safe merely because it's a bigger target.
The Open Source model definitely is an advantage as far as security goes. Having the code around can speed up bug detection and consequently, speed up fixes. There's also the fact that a programmer's name is at stake -- if you take pride in your work, you risk your reputation on it. On closed source stuff, Joe Programmer doesn't necessarily have the same reputation to lose.
The idea of "do one thing well" is also an advantage over "more features" because simplicity definitely reduces bugs. When things are cobbled together and interdepend on each other (IE/Outlook/ActiveX/OS), a security issue in one part can completely hose the others.
If someone were to attach a "your_paper.sh" and if someone did fire it up, it will definitely do damage...and anything that user has rights to becomes fair game. However, it'll keep enough of the system alive. If the machine is multi-user, the other users' data should not be affected.
For such instances, a clue-by-four or LART had always been the only solution I could think of. Until Peter Norton writes an Anti-Stupid, there's little hope there. (As one who has borked his machine...though not by worm/viruses, I could've used an Anti-Stupid for myself. The trick is to learn from those painful mistakes.)
From tests conducted at an observatory overlooking the skies of Los Angeles, researchers have concluded from the gathered data that the sky is indeed red.
Buried in all the hoopla, they never tell you that all the smoggy red photos were taken at around the time sunsets happen.
Statistics and numbers in general can be thrown any which way to serve the purpose of the writer. It's an unfortunate side-effect of being biased by nature. Even if someone were to WANT to be impartial, they'll often offer a slant merely by presenting data a certain way.
It's difficult to find people to trust when money is on the line somewhere. With Microsoft's track record and its acknowledged need for "Trustworthy Computing" (a marketing term), it's difficult to take their word. Unfortunately, with that money, they have enough marketing power to buy research, and flood biz execs with enough propaganda...and when they constantly hear that kind of information from what they'd consider mainstream sources, they start to believe it as fact.
Is WinAmp the free multimedia player of choice for Windows users? I know we've always talked about how Windows Media Player is eeeevil and RealPlayer is spyware. Where does WinAmp kick in? Does it do video or is it just a music thing? (like a free alternative to MusicMatch Jukebox or whatnot) It has been ages since I've follwed up (as a Linuxer I go between noatun and xmms)
Basically, I guess the question is how to make a strong case for WinAmp use. I already sing the praises of Firefox and recommend OpenOffice to folks who don't want/can't shell out $$ for MS Office. I recommend AVG as a free virus-scanner. Same with ZoneAlarm, Spybot S&D, and Ad-Aware. What winning argument do I use to say "use WinAmp instead of..." to Windows users who ask?
d00d, SCO's f'ed up. They're like "we coo" and then IBM's like "nu uh!" and they were like "dude, we own you" and IBM's like "sh-yeah right. Like quit bein posers. Want some o' this?" then SCO was like "well, you're all just wannabe unices" then IBM was like "man, ya'll are trippin! Like fer sure!"
We must be coming to the point where a "wearable" computer can store Gigs of info, and have a decent enough battery or a low-power camera to record everything. Yes, privacy concerns are understandable here, but I suppose like everything, it does have its uses.
I got myself a small digital camera at one point with the optimism of being able to capture interesting pictures by having my camera with me at all times. Unfortunately, it hasn't happened. With an "always on" thing, pics are easy. (yeah yeah, I figure people would mind having pictures taken of them)
If they partner with the iPod or something, they can even come up with your day's soundtrack based on where you are, what you're looking at, and maybe biofeedback sensors.:) Always thought it would be cool to be my own movie (or at least music video) -- being stuck in traffic would fire up "Everybody Hurts" by REM or something "relevant".
Ultimately, the choice depends on whether you can afford it or not. A lot of hardware gets pushed by gamers and it'll always be about having the latest and greatest for some people. With laptops, it's a bit more difficult to upgrade.
Games are best played on the desktop, especially if you're the economical type (however economical you CAN be as a gamer, anyway). At least parts are more easily swapped out, and hardware is generally cheaper.
Of course there are people who use their computing power as status symbols, and there's nothing like an uber-powered laptop to have people oohing and aahing over...like a shiny piece of metal to someone with ADD.
Then again I'm kicking myself once in a while because I didn't fork out for a better graphics card on my laptop and thus can't play stuff like UT2004 and can only play ET on the lowest resolutions. However, games are a bonus for me, not the main reason for the laptop.
For those who are thinking about getting these clips, don't!!! It's all a ploy -- the media's way of testing their Omniscience Protocol. Once you play it, something in the background will find your list of mp3's and BAM, you and your machine are toast.
Besides, I've checked it for the evil bit and sure enough, it's got Palpatine written all over it. If that doesn't stop you, maybe this will: that thing's got a subliminal message within asking you to vote Jar-Jar into office this coming election. That and ask you to mail-order some skywalker ranch wine.
The wonder here that I'm most interested about is that it uses adodb-mysql instead of PEAR. What's the ratio of ADODB vs PEAR use? Which one's better? They sure make it sound like PEAR is more "official" but I've gotten used to using ADODB, personally.
Mandrakesoft seems to have plugged its way back up to profitability and that's extremely commendable. There have been a lot of people who wish for that "One Distro To Rule Them All" and a great deal of those people were going to crown RedHat king. I was one of them.
However, I've changed my tune in the last few days or so. Mandrake was one of those distros that focused on desktop linux very early on. When folks at RedHat were reluctant to jump on the other side of the server, Mandrake went in, both feet. At the very least, that's commendable.
The sad part of the story is that Mandrake isn't as big as RedHat nor does it have the backing of a Novell the way SuSe does. One can only hope that Mandrake's survival (and profitability) ensures end-users a great desktop distro from all the competition.
I suppose someone could just ban any and all downloads of Freenet-related software so that's not going to solve anything. For anyone who ever said the mantra "Information Wants To Be Free" -- THIS is what it is meant to be.
Government-sanctioned censorship isn't anything new, though. We try to protect children with things like CIPA and the like. We've got watchdogs all over that won't allow us (folks in the US) to hear foul language over public airwaves, are looking to restrain violent video games, and in general trying to police what we do.
I'm not saying we're communistic, by any means. Just saying that censorship is censorship. Not as extreme, but the seeds are there.
In the end, it unfortunately comes down to "censorship is only bad when they're censoring something I believe in."
Ok, so I was running RH9 for a while now, doing the apt-get update/upgrade bit. Got restless and wanted KDE 3.2 so I went to the apt-kde sourceforge place and it worked for a while. Then a recent update/upgrade borked my system. No way out but reinstall. After a reinstall, I could've sworn I followed the well-meaning post on a message board about how to reinstall fonts. Locked up X until I undid all the changes from the command line and rm -rf'ed the font directory I created.
So with an operational system, I decide to go mandrake (don't like the idea of a network install with SUSE and wanted kde-friendly over fedora). Installed it, configured the network connection, rebooted...BOOM, suddenly network connection goes out. Another search on help boards suggests turning on ACPI from somewhere in drakconf. Hunted it down and am in the process of restoring files backed up from my old RH installation.
Just a few minutes ago, I got a segfault from kopete when I was trying it out just for fun. Thinking to install gaim to see if I can get THAT stable.
I love the Open Source, folks, don't get me wrong. However, I lose a bit of cred when I start talking about how tough it is to bork a Linux install. It ain't the viruses and worms -- it's the politics (lack of KDE support in RH), the scattered help sources, incompatible distros, and multiple package sources that end up borking other packages as part of a dependency hell.
Sorry, had to vent -- been mucking with this thing for two days now just trying to restore. On a good note, the 2.6.3 and KDE 3.2 seems pretty quick so far. Much quicker than RH9 was, anyway.
You want Linux adoption? We just may have to dumb it down so much that we take the fun right out of Linux. In short, most people won't jump through that many hoops just so they can run Linux.
Is there some sort of psychological predisposition among geeks to despise marketoids? Sell sell sell, lies lies lies, bottom line is the only thing that matters -- we hates it, don't we precious?
I understand the need to sell a product and to make a living off of something but DAMN! When you're part-time freelancing web work, you tend to meet a few marketeers along the way. I did a freebie personal site for someone once who dragged a friend over to me only to ask "ok, so how do we make money off of it?" Arrrrgh!
Then there's people who don't care what kind of info they have on the site as long as it's branded and linked to something that sells.
As for Microsoft -- well, we all know their marketing department seems to overpower their quality assurance department. I guess this is part of the reason I'm not thrilled with them. I'm sure I'm not alone in this either.
So, is this thing against marketeers a manifestation of the Cathedral vs. Bazaar way of thinking? Academic information sharing vs. having to sell your soul for shoddy products?
Slashdot Mirror
But Linus is so cool, how can we NOT?
:)
Seriously, though, I do believe that not everything Linus says should be doctrine and I'm sure he's been proven wrong a few times. However, this whole Linux thing is still his. I know, I know, it belongs to the world and the GPL and the one-true-communist society...but at the heart of it, Linux belongs to Linus. If nothing else, give the man his due respect.
Oh, and there's no use posting anonymously, Mr. Stallman -- yer just pissy 'cause nobody wants to hear you sing your hacker song anymore.
The argument against backporting is that a lot of wasted time/effort goes to something that could've been taken care of by upgrading to the latest/greatest kernel.
The practicality here is that not everyone needs to upgrade to the latest kernel. Some production systems are stable enough as is and don't need the upgrade. Some may even become unstable as they get upgraded. Thus if some features are needed from the newer versions, backporting allows people to utilize just the features they need.
All part of that Open Source GPL Free as in Freedom thing. Even for those who consider it a waste of time and effort, those are things that the GPL entitles anyone to put effort into. Those who are adamantly against such wasted manpower should probably consider visiting SourceForge for a coronary.
Having been a DSL user for a few years now, I can't personally imagine going back to a slow dial-up connection. The same can't be said about people going the other way, though.
:)
For a great majority of users, having a computer is enough of an issue as it is. It's a mysterious machine to them, and plugging in extra cash without knowing the benefits isn't an option.
Even if they know and understand the speed benefits, it's often not enough to convince the low-end users to switch. So the pictures download noticeably faster...then what? Unless they're downloading pr0n or swapping major files, it's not that big a deal to them. Unfortunately, this is probably the same crowd that won't wait for Windows Updates to download because it's too much of a hassle.
If you want to put the Linux vs Microsoft parallel to this situation, there's an analogy waiting to be used. People who are used to dialup will not move to the unfamiliar unless absolutely convinced that it's better, faster, and more stable. There's a lot of Windows users out there who are afraid to jump operating systems simply because they'd rather stick to the familiar.
Same thing with dialup vs. broadband. Some people will willingly suffer through low speeds because they don't believe they need anything better.
Of course the analogy breaks the moment pricing is mentioned.
Um, you must've been REALLY good with the yoyo so as to keep the bullies at bay. Otherwise, you poor, poor soul. Your rocking-the-baby or walking-the-dog must've been followed swiftly by the ultimate-wedgie or the ultrageek-beatdown.
I work at a city library with machines sponsored by the B&M Gates Learning Foundation. To pimp Free Software may incur the wrath of Redmond for an already underfunded library. We're already a frickin' MS Office infomercial as it is.
I do, however, try to make sure people know and understand the costs of MS Software as well as the benefits of Open Source/Free Software. I recommend OpenOffice for those who don't want to shell out a fortune for word processing. I tell people about Mozilla Firefox and describe the benefits it has.
I also have handouts with links to AVG Anti-Virus, Ad-Aware, and Zone Alarm. Not Open Source but "free as in beer."
To offer CD's could become a support nightmare unless you pull a "Try at your own risk" thing. Last thing a library needs are irate patrons because they borked their machines trying to use/install software YOU supplied.
If you are to do so anyway, go with OSS for Windows, first. OpenOffice, Firefox, GIMP. Then maybe the free-as-in-beer stuff I mentioned earlier for antivirus, anti-spyware, and firewalling. Then there's other stuff like Knoppix and bootable game CD's (America's Army?).
In the end, there are quite a few considerations to think about when offering software from a library. You'll have political issues, can lose some private funding/sponsorships, and even have irate patrons who mistake your goodwill for tech-support-for-life.
One of the irritating things I got to hear at the library was that when a student asked about BSODs and rebooting, the rest of the class said that it's a normal thing, and to get used to it. I had to tell them otherwise, and even then, they weren't fully convinced that instability isn't natural.
Hopefully with stuff like free software cd's, and the knoppixes of the world, people will find that there are alternatives to MS. Maybe they'll even see its simplicity, stability, and practicality.
But with Open Source, you at least have a chance to backport or code for compatibility because the code is open.
With proprietary software, that option isn't even there. If MS decided to cut support for a certain version of MS Word, for example, your company could very well be fscked. I get enough of that from MS Works to MS Word as it is.
Worse yet, if a lesser known proprietary company whom your business uses goes 404, your investment is screwed...and the chances of you porting your data onto a different system is next to nil.
The "freedoms" associated with Open Source help ensure that you're not locked down and helpless. Backwards-compatibility may be an issue, but at least it's got possible solutions. Not so in the closed-source world.
Someone once jokingly said that a broader userbase will result in less security. Thus the best way to secure software is to make sure nobody uses it.
/"
The main issue here is that the simpler an interface is, the less the user has to understand about the entire system. IF the system can sustain itself with minimal administration, it can survive.
The problem lies in making interfaces so easy that "mouse clicking solutions experts" can be lulled into thinking they've secured everything just because they've clicked on a few icons. If they understand the system fully, usability is a good thing. If you're a clueless user, a usable pointy-clicky interface can be a very dangerous thing that'll bork your system faster than you can su to root and type "rm -rf
C'mon, isn't this like using an aimbot in a FPS? Force feedback steering wheel, visual cues on the windshield -- sounds like a really posh way to play Gran Turisimo to me.
I suppose if it helps decrease the number of car accidents out there, I should be all for it. However, I've found out that as much as we rave about stupid computer users, there's at least an equal amount of stupid car drivers out there. The big difference is that if you bork your machine, you inconvenience yourself and maybe a few others who get viruses over e-mail. You bork something with your car, lives are potentially at risk.
Driving with these error-correcting systems turned on may make people rely on them too much...like a moron admin that thinks he's 100% safe after installing a firewall. This is good only if they hammer the point home that people should not rely on this to keep them safe.
Good day, eh! This Linux thing is a very good thing for the economy and all that. However the only penguin we acknowledge comes from Pittsburg and we don't like that Mario Lemieux guy all that much. If it sucks as bad as that hockey team did this season, I wouldn't stake my reputation on that penguin eh.
How 'bout we make our own brand called Maple Leaf Linux or Red Toque. Or maybe we can call it Gretzky Linux and charge 99 Canadian for it.
Heck in Edmonton the best one-two combination was Gretzky to Kurri -- The Great One and a great Finnish guy. Gretzky did his best work with the aid of a Finnish product! So is Linux good? You bet! I give it a hat trick rating.
The popularity issue can be countered with the Apache vs. IIS deal where Apache's stability and security (and reaction to vulnerability) is much better. Just because something is popular doesn't mean it's not as safe merely because it's a bigger target.
The Open Source model definitely is an advantage as far as security goes. Having the code around can speed up bug detection and consequently, speed up fixes. There's also the fact that a programmer's name is at stake -- if you take pride in your work, you risk your reputation on it. On closed source stuff, Joe Programmer doesn't necessarily have the same reputation to lose.
The idea of "do one thing well" is also an advantage over "more features" because simplicity definitely reduces bugs. When things are cobbled together and interdepend on each other (IE/Outlook/ActiveX/OS), a security issue in one part can completely hose the others.
If someone were to attach a "your_paper.sh" and if someone did fire it up, it will definitely do damage...and anything that user has rights to becomes fair game. However, it'll keep enough of the system alive. If the machine is multi-user, the other users' data should not be affected.
For such instances, a clue-by-four or LART had always been the only solution I could think of. Until Peter Norton writes an Anti-Stupid, there's little hope there. (As one who has borked his machine...though not by worm/viruses, I could've used an Anti-Stupid for myself. The trick is to learn from those painful mistakes.)
From tests conducted at an observatory overlooking the skies of Los Angeles, researchers have concluded from the gathered data that the sky is indeed red.
Buried in all the hoopla, they never tell you that all the smoggy red photos were taken at around the time sunsets happen.
Statistics and numbers in general can be thrown any which way to serve the purpose of the writer. It's an unfortunate side-effect of being biased by nature. Even if someone were to WANT to be impartial, they'll often offer a slant merely by presenting data a certain way.
It's difficult to find people to trust when money is on the line somewhere. With Microsoft's track record and its acknowledged need for "Trustworthy Computing" (a marketing term), it's difficult to take their word. Unfortunately, with that money, they have enough marketing power to buy research, and flood biz execs with enough propaganda...and when they constantly hear that kind of information from what they'd consider mainstream sources, they start to believe it as fact.
Now that's dangerous.
Is WinAmp the free multimedia player of choice for Windows users? I know we've always talked about how Windows Media Player is eeeevil and RealPlayer is spyware. Where does WinAmp kick in? Does it do video or is it just a music thing? (like a free alternative to MusicMatch Jukebox or whatnot) It has been ages since I've follwed up (as a Linuxer I go between noatun and xmms)
Basically, I guess the question is how to make a strong case for WinAmp use. I already sing the praises of Firefox and recommend OpenOffice to folks who don't want/can't shell out $$ for MS Office. I recommend AVG as a free virus-scanner. Same with ZoneAlarm, Spybot S&D, and Ad-Aware. What winning argument do I use to say "use WinAmp instead of..." to Windows users who ask?
Here's a translation for some language:
d00d, SCO's f'ed up. They're like "we coo" and then IBM's like "nu uh!" and they were like "dude, we own you" and IBM's like "sh-yeah right. Like quit bein posers. Want some o' this?" then SCO was like "well, you're all just wannabe unices" then IBM was like "man, ya'll are trippin! Like fer sure!"
We must be coming to the point where a "wearable" computer can store Gigs of info, and have a decent enough battery or a low-power camera to record everything. Yes, privacy concerns are understandable here, but I suppose like everything, it does have its uses.
:) Always thought it would be cool to be my own movie (or at least music video) -- being stuck in traffic would fire up "Everybody Hurts" by REM or something "relevant".
I got myself a small digital camera at one point with the optimism of being able to capture interesting pictures by having my camera with me at all times. Unfortunately, it hasn't happened. With an "always on" thing, pics are easy. (yeah yeah, I figure people would mind having pictures taken of them)
If they partner with the iPod or something, they can even come up with your day's soundtrack based on where you are, what you're looking at, and maybe biofeedback sensors.
1) How Stupid Are PHBs? We'll Show You!!!
2) Of Course Eunuchs Offer Better Security!
3) In PHB Language: Adoi Duh Uhhhh Umm...drooool
4) Y winbloze lusers ph33r 1337 1i|\|u>
5) Profit!
Pointy Haired Boss -- from what I understand, derived from the boss in the Dilbert cartoons.
Ultimately, the choice depends on whether you can afford it or not. A lot of hardware gets pushed by gamers and it'll always be about having the latest and greatest for some people. With laptops, it's a bit more difficult to upgrade.
Games are best played on the desktop, especially if you're the economical type (however economical you CAN be as a gamer, anyway). At least parts are more easily swapped out, and hardware is generally cheaper.
Of course there are people who use their computing power as status symbols, and there's nothing like an uber-powered laptop to have people oohing and aahing over...like a shiny piece of metal to someone with ADD.
Then again I'm kicking myself once in a while because I didn't fork out for a better graphics card on my laptop and thus can't play stuff like UT2004 and can only play ET on the lowest resolutions. However, games are a bonus for me, not the main reason for the laptop.
For those who are thinking about getting these clips, don't!!! It's all a ploy -- the media's way of testing their Omniscience Protocol. Once you play it, something in the background will find your list of mp3's and BAM, you and your machine are toast.
Besides, I've checked it for the evil bit and sure enough, it's got Palpatine written all over it. If that doesn't stop you, maybe this will: that thing's got a subliminal message within asking you to vote Jar-Jar into office this coming election. That and ask you to mail-order some skywalker ranch wine.
+100 Points to the first one to create a "Free Frenchy" sticker for this.
Bonus points if they substitute "Freedom" for French and some bad pun about not hoping he fries or whatnot.
The wonder here that I'm most interested about is that it uses adodb-mysql instead of PEAR. What's the ratio of ADODB vs PEAR use? Which one's better? They sure make it sound like PEAR is more "official" but I've gotten used to using ADODB, personally.
Couldn't resist the AC/DC reference, sorry.
Mandrakesoft seems to have plugged its way back up to profitability and that's extremely commendable. There have been a lot of people who wish for that "One Distro To Rule Them All" and a great deal of those people were going to crown RedHat king. I was one of them.
However, I've changed my tune in the last few days or so. Mandrake was one of those distros that focused on desktop linux very early on. When folks at RedHat were reluctant to jump on the other side of the server, Mandrake went in, both feet. At the very least, that's commendable.
The sad part of the story is that Mandrake isn't as big as RedHat nor does it have the backing of a Novell the way SuSe does. One can only hope that Mandrake's survival (and profitability) ensures end-users a great desktop distro from all the competition.
I suppose someone could just ban any and all downloads of Freenet-related software so that's not going to solve anything. For anyone who ever said the mantra "Information Wants To Be Free" -- THIS is what it is meant to be.
Government-sanctioned censorship isn't anything new, though. We try to protect children with things like CIPA and the like. We've got watchdogs all over that won't allow us (folks in the US) to hear foul language over public airwaves, are looking to restrain violent video games, and in general trying to police what we do.
I'm not saying we're communistic, by any means. Just saying that censorship is censorship. Not as extreme, but the seeds are there.
In the end, it unfortunately comes down to "censorship is only bad when they're censoring something I believe in."
FYI I FSCKed up my PC on RH9 (I take full responsibility, thus PEBKAC) but DLed MDK and installed OO.o and now I say STFU to MS FUD. YMMV though.
OO.o is better TCO and ROI. If you use MS (including IE), you'll need to visit NAI or get AVG ASAP or your machine will be DOA.
Ok, so I was running RH9 for a while now, doing the apt-get update/upgrade bit. Got restless and wanted KDE 3.2 so I went to the apt-kde sourceforge place and it worked for a while. Then a recent update/upgrade borked my system. No way out but reinstall. After a reinstall, I could've sworn I followed the well-meaning post on a message board about how to reinstall fonts. Locked up X until I undid all the changes from the command line and rm -rf'ed the font directory I created.
So with an operational system, I decide to go mandrake (don't like the idea of a network install with SUSE and wanted kde-friendly over fedora). Installed it, configured the network connection, rebooted...BOOM, suddenly network connection goes out. Another search on help boards suggests turning on ACPI from somewhere in drakconf. Hunted it down and am in the process of restoring files backed up from my old RH installation.
Just a few minutes ago, I got a segfault from kopete when I was trying it out just for fun. Thinking to install gaim to see if I can get THAT stable.
I love the Open Source, folks, don't get me wrong. However, I lose a bit of cred when I start talking about how tough it is to bork a Linux install. It ain't the viruses and worms -- it's the politics (lack of KDE support in RH), the scattered help sources, incompatible distros, and multiple package sources that end up borking other packages as part of a dependency hell.
Sorry, had to vent -- been mucking with this thing for two days now just trying to restore. On a good note, the 2.6.3 and KDE 3.2 seems pretty quick so far. Much quicker than RH9 was, anyway.
You want Linux adoption? We just may have to dumb it down so much that we take the fun right out of Linux. In short, most people won't jump through that many hoops just so they can run Linux.
Is there some sort of psychological predisposition among geeks to despise marketoids? Sell sell sell, lies lies lies, bottom line is the only thing that matters -- we hates it, don't we precious?
I understand the need to sell a product and to make a living off of something but DAMN! When you're part-time freelancing web work, you tend to meet a few marketeers along the way. I did a freebie personal site for someone once who dragged a friend over to me only to ask "ok, so how do we make money off of it?" Arrrrgh!
Then there's people who don't care what kind of info they have on the site as long as it's branded and linked to something that sells.
As for Microsoft -- well, we all know their marketing department seems to overpower their quality assurance department. I guess this is part of the reason I'm not thrilled with them. I'm sure I'm not alone in this either.
So, is this thing against marketeers a manifestation of the Cathedral vs. Bazaar way of thinking? Academic information sharing vs. having to sell your soul for shoddy products?