Because 80% of the time, someone can't take home the new device they bought and hook it up to Linux.
Uhh, that would be because major device manufactures don't bother *making* linux drivers. So you have to wait for the kernel devs to make them for you. Think of how it would be if no hardware manufacturer made windows drivers, and you had to rely on microsoft drivers for everything you use. Because in that respect, linux is *far* better with device drivers.
Kinda reminds me of a quote in an irc conversation. About the gnome 2.6 summit presentation, with a picture of an ATM running gnome.
Why does this ATM only give me fast cash and balance options?
The other choices would be too confusing for you, ya noob.
At least KDE gives you the options. With gnome, if you were truly "leet" and wanted an option that isn't available, you'd just edit the config file. Kinda defeats the purpose of a gui, eh?
I use virtual desktops on my linux workstation, and they're a constant pain- an inelegant solution. An opened terminal doesn't open where it should go, it opens where you currently are. You have to move them between VTs. You have to remember which one you're in, and which one you want to go to. They DO NOT solve the problem Expose is designed to solve- finding one out of many windows on the screen, very quickly.
You seem to be missing the point of the virtual desktops. If you were using them properly, you wouldn't open a vitual terminal on "the wrong desktop". If you want to type in a terminal, you'd go to the desktop with virtual terminals on them, and type in one of the open ones. Once you get in this habit, you will automatically think to switch to your terminal desktop when doing anything terminal-oriented. Combine that with robust "remember" settings (like those seen in enlightenment) and you'll never run into this issue. (for instance in enlightenment all xterms or eterms can be "remembered" to pop up on a given desktop, or simply launched at startup on the proper desktop)
Basically, Linux WM's are better at getting you organized to begin with, not just making your clutter easier to wade around in.
Don't get it? Here's a quote:
"Those window managers rely on the featureset of Windows, features like maximize and minimize. What you must realize is that these are just like all the features of any other windowing system -- some of these features can be remembered, others, can be scripted. What you must learn, is that these few features do not apply to you."
"What do you mean, I can make a window always on top?"
"What I'm telling you, is that when you are ready, you won't have to."
Sid acutally has something of the likes of 13,000 packages in it's main repo. And most debian end-users use sid anyway (who the hell wants 2 year old software?)
What I'm looking forward to in fedora is the fact that many OSS developers package their software as RPM, and hardly any make any.debs. This task is usually left up to debian's package maintainers, who do most of the work with making packages that adhere to their standards. But that's a lot of strain and effor on their parts.
With more developer support, fedora has a greater capability of growing and expanding past what debian is currently doing, which is what will give debian a run for it's money.
3,000 packages? Where's a cluebat when you need one?
If alien truly did work well, this story wouldn't be big news. What they're talking about is potentially allowing rpms and.debs to coexist on the same system. Obviously, given the differences between the two package formats, that is a difficult task.
Right now, it's easy to just convert.debs to.rpms and vice versa, via alien. But you dont see anyone (practically) taking the entire debian/unstable repository and converting them to RPMs, do you? No, because the two package types don't work well together. They have totally different configuration frameworks, and as of now, don't coexist well at all. Hell, you can even install Redhat's package manager onto a debian system and start installing rpms to your heart's content, but that's generally Not a Good Idea.
So for the short term, unless debian's and redhat's project leaders really sit down and discuss what their goals are in this situation, all I see is a very unstable package management system.
And I wouldn't hold my breath, either. It took the debian package maintainers over a month to just put gnome2.4 into sid. Think of how long it would take those same people to encapsulate an entire distrobution's worth of packages (or at least the technology to do so) into their mainline repository.
My whole experience with Transgaming is...rip-off.
At 5 dollars a month for a minimum payment of 3 months, that's not a very big ripoff. I can get about 5 of 7 of my games to work in WineX (Current games), and the other 2 that don't work are because I didn't bother adding things to WineX's registry. I've subscribed for about 5 months now and I think it was a very worthy investment.
Just like a computer virus (or worm, or mere fork-bomb) could expand to take up all your memory, so could a Von Neuman robot replicate to eventually use up all the metals and silicates on a planet (or even galaxy).
Like in the book 2012 when alien vN-style monoliths consumed Jupiter, making it really dense, turning it into a star.
A year and a half without a terrorist act. Either the Patriot Act works or the terrorists have been in a good mood lately. My guess is the former.
I also have a rock that keeps tigers away. I've been using it for years and haven't encountered one tiger. You can buy it for a small sum, if you'd like...
After the girl has sex with him after seeing the soda fountain:
girl: I'm breaking up with you.
guy: Why?
girl: Because you're a pedophile.
guy: Why, that's an awfully big word for an eight-year-old...
Software developers really need to look at this lesson. Repeat after me, "The name of your program doesn't have to start with 'Win', 'g', 'k', 'Java', or 'X'".
Hey, there's no reason to come down on the developers who name their program after what it's used for. Gkrellm, Kdevelop, Gnibbles, Ktron, etc. all use the g or k or whatever to mean that it's built for Gnome, KDE, or just plain X. Especially when they're like the small programs I just mentioned that don't do much but one function anyway.
What should wiped off the face of linux is the stupid recurring-acronym system (WINE, LAME, etc.) Yeah, your program is GNU, but it doesn't need to be all "cleverly" named like that, a G is enough.
Lindows is not a stupid name. It tries to form a link between Linux and Windows, even though it's not very successful. It's just a coincidence that the first syllable in Linux and the first syllable in Windows rhyme. (But then again, Winux would have been a better choice) It's not the name that's the problem, it's the crummy OS.
It makes me wonder why microsoft hasn't started making BIOS's a long time ago. It would be a good way to implement some embedded software, which seems to be the goal of the whole.NET strategy. I can see microsoft BIOS's that are specially meant to handle Windows' API's, and maybe could further their monopoly by only being able to launch microsoft operating systems.
Then again, would they really be called microsoft anymore if they did that? It'd be more like microhard.
What I see ahead for this is more machines substituting for human jobs. If the price of this comes down, then companies would rather get a gaggle of these things than pay people to do the work. Take this onto a global scale and you get more people out of a job. True, the lower costs of gadgets such as cellphones and radios would make the standard of living better, but people will be out of jobs.
Hey, who are you to say that's bad coding? I took a web design class in high school and one of the first things our teacher taught us was how to make a separate page that says "You need internet explorer to view this page."
And if my teacher says to use internet explorer, it must be good! Albiet we were just using FrontPage for all our web editing...
The problem is that growth in wealth is exponential. A rich person can make money at a much faster rate than a poor person with out working nearly as hard. At that point, millions of dollars will come in at the same time that a less fortunate person will make one thousand. While at the same time, at the other end of the world, 1.3 billion people live on the equivalent of less than one dollar a day.
But that doesn't mean we have to get rid of all corporation ownership and stock markets, and make everything a huge communist collective. Elitism and the 'richest 1 percent' are things that you have to deal with in a capitalist country, and for all the advantages capitalism brings, it's worth it.
This article reminds me of some of the posters my teacher had on his wall. They were old magazine clippings, one of them was one of nixon resigning, and one of the other articles on the front page was how "Mother Earth is Losing a Bit of her Pull" and was about how gravity is decreasing and becoming more toward the equator over the years. Seems crap like this is always interesting to some people.
Slashdot Mirror
Doesn't that just reinforce his point? iMacs force you to buy new monitors too, in your case.
That was the dumbest thing I have ever read.
God damn hippie.
Because 80% of the time, someone can't take home the new device they bought and hook it up to Linux. Uhh, that would be because major device manufactures don't bother *making* linux drivers. So you have to wait for the kernel devs to make them for you. Think of how it would be if no hardware manufacturer made windows drivers, and you had to rely on microsoft drivers for everything you use. Because in that respect, linux is *far* better with device drivers.
Isn't Internet Protocol and Intellectual Property enough for these two letters? Let's all choose a different buzzword. kthxbai
Kinda reminds me of a quote in an irc conversation. About the gnome 2.6 summit presentation, with a picture of an ATM running gnome.
Why does this ATM only give me fast cash and balance options?
The other choices would be too confusing for you, ya noob.
At least KDE gives you the options. With gnome, if you were truly "leet" and wanted an option that isn't available, you'd just edit the config file. Kinda defeats the purpose of a gui, eh?
http://www.kniggit.net/wwol26.html
This is a great place to start. It's very comprehensive, and a worthy read.
But if you really want a ultra-summed-up explination, 2.6 has 63.8% more kickassedness than 2.4 does. That and ALSA support built in.
I use virtual desktops on my linux workstation, and they're a constant pain- an inelegant solution. An opened terminal doesn't open where it should go, it opens where you currently are. You have to move them between VTs. You have to remember which one you're in, and which one you want to go to. They DO NOT solve the problem Expose is designed to solve- finding one out of many windows on the screen, very quickly.
You seem to be missing the point of the virtual desktops. If you were using them properly, you wouldn't open a vitual terminal on "the wrong desktop". If you want to type in a terminal, you'd go to the desktop with virtual terminals on them, and type in one of the open ones. Once you get in this habit, you will automatically think to switch to your terminal desktop when doing anything terminal-oriented. Combine that with robust "remember" settings (like those seen in enlightenment) and you'll never run into this issue. (for instance in enlightenment all xterms or eterms can be "remembered" to pop up on a given desktop, or simply launched at startup on the proper desktop)
Basically, Linux WM's are better at getting you organized to begin with, not just making your clutter easier to wade around in.
Don't get it? Here's a quote:
"Those window managers rely on the featureset of Windows, features like maximize and minimize. What you must realize is that these are just like all the features of any other windowing system -- some of these features can be remembered, others, can be scripted. What you must learn, is that these few features do not apply to you."
"What do you mean, I can make a window always on top?"
"What I'm telling you, is that when you are ready, you won't have to."
Sid acutally has something of the likes of 13,000 packages in it's main repo. And most debian end-users use sid anyway (who the hell wants 2 year old software?)
What I'm looking forward to in fedora is the fact that many OSS developers package their software as RPM, and hardly any make any .debs. This task is usually left up to debian's package maintainers, who do most of the work with making packages that adhere to their standards. But that's a lot of strain and effor on their parts.
With more developer support, fedora has a greater capability of growing and expanding past what debian is currently doing, which is what will give debian a run for it's money.
3,000 packages? Where's a cluebat when you need one?
Because he's l33t!!!!!!!!!!1111111111!!!!!!!!11oneoneoneoneone! !!!11!!!!!!111!
If alien truly did work well, this story wouldn't be big news. What they're talking about is potentially allowing rpms and .debs to coexist on the same system. Obviously, given the differences between the two package formats, that is a difficult task.
Right now, it's easy to just convert .debs to .rpms and vice versa, via alien. But you dont see anyone (practically) taking the entire debian/unstable repository and converting them to RPMs, do you? No, because the two package types don't work well together. They have totally different configuration frameworks, and as of now, don't coexist well at all. Hell, you can even install Redhat's package manager onto a debian system and start installing rpms to your heart's content, but that's generally Not a Good Idea.
So for the short term, unless debian's and redhat's project leaders really sit down and discuss what their goals are in this situation, all I see is a very unstable package management system.
And I wouldn't hold my breath, either. It took the debian package maintainers over a month to just put gnome2.4 into sid. Think of how long it would take those same people to encapsulate an entire distrobution's worth of packages (or at least the technology to do so) into their mainline repository.
P.S.
Daryl McBride died on his way to his home planet.
At 5 dollars a month for a minimum payment of 3 months, that's not a very big ripoff. I can get about 5 of 7 of my games to work in WineX (Current games), and the other 2 that don't work are because I didn't bother adding things to WineX's registry. I've subscribed for about 5 months now and I think it was a very worthy investment.
Yeah, but its quanti-sonic architecture makes it do more work per mach-cycle, making mach .95 seem more like mach 2.2
Like in the book 2012 when alien vN-style monoliths consumed Jupiter, making it really dense, turning it into a star.
I also have a rock that keeps tigers away. I've been using it for years and haven't encountered one tiger. You can buy it for a small sum, if you'd like...
After the girl has sex with him after seeing the soda fountain: girl: I'm breaking up with you. guy: Why? girl: Because you're a pedophile. guy: Why, that's an awfully big word for an eight-year-old...
Hey, there's no reason to come down on the developers who name their program after what it's used for. Gkrellm, Kdevelop, Gnibbles, Ktron, etc. all use the g or k or whatever to mean that it's built for Gnome, KDE, or just plain X. Especially when they're like the small programs I just mentioned that don't do much but one function anyway.
What should wiped off the face of linux is the stupid recurring-acronym system (WINE, LAME, etc.) Yeah, your program is GNU, but it doesn't need to be all "cleverly" named like that, a G is enough.
Lindows is not a stupid name. It tries to form a link between Linux and Windows, even though it's not very successful. It's just a coincidence that the first syllable in Linux and the first syllable in Windows rhyme. (But then again, Winux would have been a better choice) It's not the name that's the problem, it's the crummy OS.
It makes me wonder why microsoft hasn't started making BIOS's a long time ago. It would be a good way to implement some embedded software, which seems to be the goal of the whole .NET strategy. I can see microsoft BIOS's that are specially meant to handle Windows' API's, and maybe could further their monopoly by only being able to launch microsoft operating systems.
Then again, would they really be called microsoft anymore if they did that? It'd be more like microhard.
What I see ahead for this is more machines substituting for human jobs. If the price of this comes down, then companies would rather get a gaggle of these things than pay people to do the work. Take this onto a global scale and you get more people out of a job. True, the lower costs of gadgets such as cellphones and radios would make the standard of living better, but people will be out of jobs.
Hmmmm... If only google was open source. Then maybe you would have a relevent comment.
Hey, who are you to say that's bad coding? I took a web design class in high school and one of the first things our teacher taught us was how to make a separate page that says "You need internet explorer to view this page."
And if my teacher says to use internet explorer, it must be good! Albiet we were just using FrontPage for all our web editing...
or how bout CompuCanadianHyperMegaNet?
The problem is that growth in wealth is exponential. A rich person can make money at a much faster rate than a poor person with out working nearly as hard. At that point, millions of dollars will come in at the same time that a less fortunate person will make one thousand. While at the same time, at the other end of the world, 1.3 billion people live on the equivalent of less than one dollar a day.
But that doesn't mean we have to get rid of all corporation ownership and stock markets, and make everything a huge communist collective. Elitism and the 'richest 1 percent' are things that you have to deal with in a capitalist country, and for all the advantages capitalism brings, it's worth it.
This article reminds me of some of the posters my teacher had on his wall. They were old magazine clippings, one of them was one of nixon resigning, and one of the other articles on the front page was how "Mother Earth is Losing a Bit of her Pull" and was about how gravity is decreasing and becoming more toward the equator over the years. Seems crap like this is always interesting to some people.
100x redundant