At the risk of sounding like I have a bad attitude, I think the whole VMWare concept stinks. It might have made sense 10 years ago when hardware prices were much higher than today, but with clones being dirt cheap, this product is simply much too little far too late.
I cant believe people would actually consider slowing thier boxes down, basically dividing its hw resources in half and doubling the chances of a system crash to have this astonishing abilitity to run unreliable crashware winbloz concurrently with their Linux boxes. Stupid. Buy a new machine. If you can't afford a new machine, get a job! (what a concept).
Now about the proposed open source project to clone Vmware, I'd like to suggest to these people, they should divert their creative energies into existing projects that need help, for example GNOME. A vmware clone will have a very limited target audience, be of almost no use to the linux community as a whole. What a waste of valuable resources!!! We should channel our valuable resources into areas where linux is weak. Not wasting good programming efforts on sillyness like a VMWare clone. Good god almighty, what are these people thinking? My 2 cents worth.
I have read Mr. Lewis's posts on the PCWeek forums and let me tell you this guy made a complete fool out of himself in the process. He is a known Linux AND open source basher. Mr. Mettler mistakeningly believes that Open Source itself is a security risk. He calls himself a programmer, yet he's not produced one single line of code showing how Open Source, I.E. Linux itself can or would be insecure because their sources are available. In the end, this individual is a Microsoft Troll. He wants to make a name for himself by spouting non-existant security flaws in Linux and OSS in general, without offering one single bit of evidence to back up his claims. He can be safely ignored as being yet another sleazy attorney trying to ride on the coat tails of Linux and OSS, backstabbing it for the duration of the ride. This individual is best left ignored and he will go away.
Leiws A Mettler: Just go away. You have lost your credibility. No one takes you seriously. And by the way, so that you know: Unix/Linux people might seem arrogant to you because of the way you carry yourself in public forums. Everyone seems arrogant to a simpleton.
I downloaded this wonderful piece of closed software only to have it lock my SUSE 6.0 running 2.2.3 kernel. All kinds of installation problems and lockups. The install program did manage to change the symlinks to my X server, only to lockup during the rest of the install. Thus it broke my X (which I had to restore my previous symlinks). This box is rock solid, so to give Display Doctor a fair hand shake I tried it on a different SUSE box, only this one was running the 2.0.36 kernel. Same crap. After I got both boxes X running again, I deleted this non Scottish crap off my scsi drives. Perhaps others have had good luck with this software, but it really screwed things up on mine. Besides, from what I can tell there is no source code available for it, so what good is it?
I use X11 amp. While it uses a lot of memory when playing, its quite fast and uses almost no cpu on my system. Very nice program with the source code of course. Interesting that I've not seen X11 amp discussed to any great degree here. It slices, dices and plays mp3's too.
Yeah.. Let's just all support HP's efforts. Let them release some half baked buggy source code, let the linux community fix the problems and watch HP make millions of $$$ for our efforts.
This might have been discussed in the past, but alas I do not know. For the sake of argument, say a company or an individual is actually violating the GPL. Who enforces it? Where does the money come from for legal expenses? What if a company the size and strength of say Microsoft was outright violating the GPL? Repeated attempts to get them within the rules of the license fails. Exactally who sends them to court? Who pays the expenses, and if damages are occured, who gets awarded the money? Certainly if said GPL code was mine, I could not afford to fight them in court. And if the code is more generic like the Kernel which has been modified, what happens then? So the real crux of the question is whether the GPL is actually enforcable or not. Whats the procedure?
Has anyone ever bothered to consider the Redmond based giant, Microsoft, is behind this latest push for Linux which dramatically increased during the DOJ US VS. M$ Trial, and is....
I have thought about this and the possibility does exist IMO. I have even entertained the idea that MS has paid off the press to say nice things about Linux as well. Perhaps I'm being paranoid, but MS has a reputation of cunning, and based on their prior tactics it wouldnt surprise me one single bit.
OTH, I can see where a lot of people are simply getting sick and tired of Microsoft and the lack of alternatives. Linux is the result of some damn good software engineering, and it truly does live up to all the hype spread about it in the rags. Also all the announcements of late from some really big names in the computer world, offering Linux products and support cannot be ignored. MS has clout but not that much. So in the end, I think I have been overly paranoid. It's a side effect from my OS/2 days when it really looked like OS/2 was going to be a good alternative to Windows. It never happened of course partly because of dirty underhanded Microsoft tactics, and partly because of complete stupidity on IBM's part (for which I have never forgiven either company for these sins). With that said, perhaps a lot of us old hand OS/2'ers are a paranoid lot because we have experienced first hand the Microsoft standard operating procedures with regards to competition.
I really think Linux can stand on it's own two feet, given the opportunity to do so. And now it looks like the 'window' of opportunity is here for Linux. Therefore I'm taking the cautious route acknowledging that Microsoft is more than capable of doing things like this to promote its own evil products, but also that Linux really is a rock solid, stable OS that can very easily compete in the marketplace. However I think it's only a matter of time before the press starts doing an about face and jumbs back onto the Windows bandwagon at linux's expense. Hope I'm wrong, but I've seen it before.
This latest news leaves no room for doubt for those who have continued to defend Microsoft's practices in the face of overwhelming evidence the government has presented to the contrary. I think the government should petition the court to file charges against Microsoft for falsifying evidence and for lying. Microsoft has an established pattern of lying in it's history. They have lied so often it has become second nature to them. I'm afraid that Microsoft has fallen victim to its own lies and is starting to believe them.
Personally, I am outraged by Microsofts pathetic behavour. They have been breaking the law for so long, they somehow think they are immune to the laws of the United States. Lying, stealing, cheating, back stabbing have all become standard operating procedure for MS. Any CEO that would consider doing business with MS after all these facts have become public should be fired by their board of directors for lack of moral character. In the end, I think the public at large is finally getting a first hand look at the Lying, cheating arrogant shitheads Microsoft really is. You reap what you sow.
yes but linux with bad 2YK bomb and mostly just for sevrers, not for on the desk-top. i do not recomend you to try this unless your VERY good with computers or have used them already.
First off: What Y2K 'BOMB' in Linux are you referring to? Did you actually read the GNU Y2K issues article? Pray tell me where that Linux Y2K bomb is. Inquiring minds wish to know. Second: Your comment about Linux not being a desktop os defies logic. Obviously you have *NOT* used Window Maker, for if you had, you wouldn't be making this comment. Actually a preconfigured Window Maker desktop is vastly superior to Windows GUI in many ways. The software is evolving, so naturally it might be missing some functionality you might expect elsewhere, however, with each release Window Maker has proven itself to be more functional and reliable. So I completely disagree with the conclusions you have made on both Linux and its window managers.
I'd wager most people here dislike Microsoft for a variety of reasons. And much of the hate directed at Microsoft is well deserved. With that said, MY suggestion is if you don't like this then visit www.microsoft.com and be happy as most of the Microsoft bashing that does occur here is the plain and simple truth.
OS/2 has some flaws. The biggest flaw is it's single message queue (SMQ) which quite frequently can cause the Work Place Shell to hang, forcing a reboot. Additionally IBM needs to do some work on the Warp kernel. There is still not true kill -9 capability. While Os/2's memory management works well most of the time, *sometimes* it can commit pages to the swapfile but never release the memory back to the system correctly. Warp as a stand alone server is very very reliable. As a client, unless IBM incorporates multiple message queues, it can be quite frustrating to use depending upon your application mix. Using Netscape under Warp can be quite a nausating experience at times. The OS/2 SMQ problem is the primary reason I have migrated to Linux. Having to reboot the system in order to clear a clogged message queue in PM is simply unacceptable behavor period.
The UI in Warp IMO, is very easy and quite flexible. Lightyears ahead of anything else on the planet. The workplace shell's biggest fault was the fact that OS/2 only had a Single Message Queue, thereby causing a lot of hangs in PM. I never have understood why IBM didnt fix that. The SMQ is OS/2's biggest fault IMO. It forced me to start using Linux which doesnt have that problem 8)
I agree. How these immature numb skulls call themselves hackers is quite offensive. IMO people like Linus and Alan Cox are the only one's deserving of of the title 'HACKER'. The rest are just hacker wanna-be's.
Slashdot Mirror
I cant believe people would actually consider slowing thier boxes down, basically dividing its hw resources in half and doubling the chances of a system crash to have this astonishing abilitity to run unreliable crashware winbloz concurrently with their Linux boxes. Stupid. Buy a new machine. If you can't afford a new machine, get a job! (what a concept).
Now about the proposed open source project to clone Vmware, I'd like to suggest to these people, they should divert their creative energies into existing projects that need help, for example GNOME. A vmware clone will have a very limited target audience, be of almost no use to the linux community as a whole. What a waste of valuable resources!!! We should channel our valuable resources into areas where linux is weak. Not wasting good programming efforts on sillyness like a VMWare clone. Good god almighty, what are these people thinking?
My 2 cents worth.
I have read Mr. Lewis's posts on the PCWeek forums and let me tell you this guy made a complete fool out of himself in the process. He is a known Linux AND open source basher. Mr. Mettler mistakeningly believes that Open Source itself is a security risk. He calls himself a programmer, yet he's not produced one single line of code showing how Open Source, I.E. Linux itself can or would be insecure because their sources are available. In the end, this individual is a Microsoft Troll. He wants to make a name for himself by spouting non-existant security flaws in Linux and OSS in general, without offering one single bit of evidence to back up his claims. He can be safely ignored as being yet another sleazy attorney trying to ride on the coat tails of Linux and OSS, backstabbing it for the duration of the ride. This individual is best left ignored and he will go away.
Leiws A Mettler: Just go away. You have lost your credibility. No one takes you seriously. And by the way, so that you know: Unix/Linux people might seem arrogant to you because of the way you carry yourself in public forums. Everyone seems arrogant to a simpleton.
I downloaded this wonderful piece of closed software only to have it lock my SUSE 6.0 running 2.2.3 kernel. All kinds of installation problems and lockups. The install program did manage to change the symlinks to my X server, only to lockup during the rest of the install. Thus it broke my X (which I had to restore my previous symlinks). This box is rock solid, so to give Display Doctor a fair hand shake I tried it on a different SUSE box, only this one was running the 2.0.36 kernel. Same crap. After I got both boxes X running again, I deleted this non Scottish crap off my scsi drives. Perhaps others have had good luck with this software, but it really screwed things up on mine. Besides, from what I can tell there is no source code available for it, so what good is it?
I use X11 amp. While it uses a lot of memory when playing, its quite fast and uses almost no cpu on my system. Very nice program with the source code of course. Interesting that I've not seen X11 amp discussed to any great degree here. It slices, dices and plays mp3's too.
Yeah.. Let's just all support HP's efforts. Let them release some half baked buggy source code, let the linux community fix the problems and watch HP make millions of $$$ for our efforts.
I'd like to know how to do this as well.
If you don't like whats happening with Linux these days, then just move over to BSD. Im sure the BSD people could use the attention.
This might have been discussed in the past, but alas I do not know. For the sake of argument, say
a company or an individual is actually violating the GPL. Who enforces it? Where does the money come from for legal expenses? What if a company
the size and strength of say Microsoft was outright violating the GPL? Repeated attempts to get them within the rules of the license fails. Exactally who sends them to court? Who pays the expenses, and if damages are occured, who gets awarded the money? Certainly if said GPL code was mine, I could not afford to fight them in court. And if the code is more generic like the Kernel which has been modified, what happens then? So the real crux of the question is whether the GPL is actually enforcable or not. Whats the procedure?
apparently all that was important for this individual was that 'First comment'. People can
be so outrageously stupid sometimes.
Who cares about your Bill Gates Dumbfuckware?
I have thought about this and the possibility does exist IMO. I have even entertained the idea that MS has paid off the press to say nice things about Linux as well. Perhaps I'm being paranoid, but MS has a reputation of cunning, and based on their prior tactics it wouldnt surprise me one single bit.
OTH, I can see where a lot of people are simply getting sick and tired of Microsoft and the lack of alternatives. Linux is the result of some damn good software engineering, and it truly does live up to all the hype spread about it in the rags. Also all the announcements of late from some really big names in the computer world, offering Linux products and support cannot be ignored. MS has clout but not that much. So in the end, I think I have been overly paranoid. It's a side effect from my OS/2 days when it really looked like OS/2 was going to be a good alternative to Windows. It never happened of course partly because of dirty underhanded Microsoft tactics, and partly because of complete stupidity on IBM's part (for which I have never forgiven either company for these sins). With that said, perhaps a lot of us old hand OS/2'ers are a paranoid lot because we have experienced first hand the Microsoft standard operating procedures with regards to competition.
I really think Linux can stand on it's own two feet, given the opportunity to do so. And now it looks like the 'window' of opportunity is here for Linux. Therefore I'm taking the cautious route acknowledging that Microsoft is more than capable of doing things like this to promote its own evil products, but also that Linux really is a rock solid, stable OS that can very easily compete in the marketplace. However I think it's only a matter of time before the press starts doing an about face and jumbs back onto the Windows bandwagon at linux's expense. Hope I'm wrong, but I've seen it before.
Personally, I am outraged by Microsofts pathetic behavour. They have been breaking the law for so long, they somehow think they are immune to the laws of the United States. Lying, stealing, cheating, back stabbing have all become standard operating procedure for MS. Any CEO that would consider doing business with MS after all these facts have become public should be fired by their board of directors for lack of moral character. In the end, I think the public at large is finally getting a first hand look at the Lying, cheating arrogant shitheads Microsoft really is. You reap what you sow.
yes but linux with bad 2YK bomb and mostly just for sevrers, not for on the desk-top. i do not recomend you to try this unless your VERY good with computers or have used them already.
First off: What Y2K 'BOMB' in Linux are you referring to? Did you actually read the GNU Y2K issues article? Pray tell me where that Linux Y2K bomb is. Inquiring minds wish to know.
Second: Your comment about Linux not being a desktop os defies logic. Obviously you have *NOT* used Window Maker, for if you had, you wouldn't be making this comment.
Actually a preconfigured Window Maker desktop is vastly superior to Windows GUI in many ways. The software is evolving, so naturally it might be missing some functionality you might expect elsewhere, however, with each release Window Maker has proven itself to be more functional and reliable.
So I completely disagree with the conclusions you have made on both Linux and its window managers.
cheers
Ron
I'd wager most people here dislike Microsoft for a variety of reasons. And much of the hate directed at Microsoft is well deserved. With that said, MY suggestion is if you don't like this then visit www.microsoft.com and be happy as most of the Microsoft bashing that does occur here is the plain and simple truth.
Cheers
Ron
OS/2 has some flaws. The biggest flaw is it's single message queue (SMQ) which quite frequently can cause the Work Place Shell to hang, forcing a reboot. Additionally IBM needs to do some work on the Warp kernel. There is still not true kill -9 capability. While Os/2's memory management works well most of the time, *sometimes* it can commit pages to the swapfile but never release the memory back to the system correctly. Warp as a stand alone server is very very reliable. As a client, unless IBM incorporates multiple message queues, it can be quite frustrating to use depending upon your application mix. Using Netscape under Warp can be quite a nausating experience at times. The OS/2 SMQ problem is the primary reason I have migrated to Linux. Having to reboot the system in order to clear a clogged message queue in PM is simply unacceptable behavor period.
The UI in Warp IMO, is very easy and quite flexible. Lightyears ahead of anything else on the planet. The workplace shell's biggest fault was the fact that OS/2 only had a Single Message Queue, thereby causing a lot of hangs in PM. I never have understood why IBM didnt fix that. The SMQ is OS/2's biggest fault IMO. It forced me to start using Linux which doesnt have that problem 8)
Ron
I agree. How these immature numb skulls call themselves hackers is quite offensive. IMO people like Linus and Alan Cox are the only one's deserving of of the title 'HACKER'. The rest are just hacker wanna-be's.
Ron