I say OS X isn't competition for Linux or MS because as I said, OS X doesn't run on x86 hardware. This alone prevents it from truly competing with Windows or Linux.
As Joe User, I am out to buy a computer and see a Mac and a cheap wintel machine. The Mac costs twice as much. I ask the salesman, "What can I do on the expensive one that I can't do on the cheap one?". He replies with "They can do the same things". I'm going for the cheaper one (with more impressive marketable specs).
And saying OS X is no threat to Linux or MS is not off base. Until I can install OS X on my x86 machines, it is no threat to Windows or Linux, as it's not even an option.
I would have agreed with you on this a year or two ago, but Linux has grown enough since then that it can compete with the functionality of Windows as a desktop. OpenOffice is poised to be an MS Office killer. Those are the only two things MS makes a profit on. They lose tons of money everywhere else.
If Linux starts pecking away at their two cash cows, they won't be able to lose billions on a non profitable anti-competitive ventures. Their stranglehold on the market is loosened.
I know it's not happening overnight, but I think withing 5 years Linux could very well oust M$. 5 years is an eternity in the IT industry.
Think of how far Linux has come in the past 5 years. Now think how far M$ has come.
Never going to happen. The main reason being that OS X runs on apple's hardware, not x86. x86 hardware rules market share because it is cheap and readily available from a great number of merchants. Mac hardware is expensive and hard(er) to find.
"Mac OS X is a single OS, as opposed to a set of OSes that may or may not work together."
OS X is no more a single OS than Linux is a single OS. Linux interoperates just fine with other Linux machines. Don't confuse the operating system with the applications.
"Also, OS X also has the backing of a long established company that will probably be around in the foreseeable future."
And Linux has IBM. At least they're not constantly going out of business:)
"OS X is also a BSD, which is a much better OS than Linux. "
Mod -1 Flamebait. BSD is not a better OS than Linux, nor is Linux better than BSD. Make your arguments based on credible facts, not personal opinion.
"Lastly, Apple is adopting a less proprietary model and much of the operating system is open source, so many of the benefits of a completely open source OS are there too."
A less proprietary model than Linux, where ALL of the OS is open source? I doubt that.
I like and use OS X, but it's not competition for Linux. It's a good OS, and has it's places, but it's no threat to Linux or MS.
I like using text to speech synthesis software such as Festival to have text read to me while I work. Granted it's not always the most articulate, it gets 99% of the job done just fine..
Buzzwords? Why don't you give me a single example of a buzzword I used.
You hide behind cowardly and false accusations in attempt to draw attention away from the fact that you have no clue what's going on.
" 1. I have been an MCSE for years, I passed it in two months w.o even studying hard. My experience was all that was necessary."
MCSE is worthless, and you make that clear. I am ashamed to be an MCSE. I'll happily brag about my other certs, but I am literally ashamed to be an MCSE. Ashamed that I was almost as clueless as you once.
"2. I am not going to become an expert on this shat unless I need to use it. I happen to work for a living, and have many other things that I need to be an expert on right now."
You already said you needed something like this for your line of work. Hypocrite.
"3. You use all the right buzz words. You must be a consultant or a tinkerer. Go back to reading your subscription to Linux User and PC World magazines. Maybe you can learn more buzz words to throw around."
I didn't use any buzzwords. I guess instead of using the proper terminology I should dumb it down for you and say things like "Microsoft is using this math stuff that makes it hard to read a file unless you know your math real good."
After reading your posts in response to mine and others, it has become blaringly obvious you are a complete and utter dipshit. Still working hard for your MCP I bet.
RMS is based solely on encryption and permission flags. Documents are converted into encrypted XrML, which an RMS enabled application can decrypt and interpret, and apply the proper permissions to.
To make it simple for your sake, this translates to:
Win 2K3 will use proprietary document formats.
This is not Palladium, this is not "Trusted Computing". This is an application dependant security measure. Really no different that password protecting a zip file.
So if I have read permission to a file, I can open up that file with Open Office or whatever application is first to reverse engineer the encryption and strip the XrML and copy the file as I see fit.
The idea that I couldn't still copy the binary, or simply the information from a screen grab is ridiculous. I just can't manipulate it within an RMS enabled application. If I have read permission to the binary, I can move it. If I can move it, I can manipulate it in any way I please.
Looks like you got suckered by the M$ propaganda machine, and like so many other clueless "Windows power users" you blindly throw all your faith in it with out understanding what it really even is.
You're a pathetic fool. I hope the company you work for realizes how usless you are and replaces you with inexpensive software.
Eh? Reason didn't write or publish this paper, they are just covering it. And other than that you were just rambling on. Perhaps you should take a vacation from slashdot for awhile..
"But I'd venture a guess that with OSX converting Linux users left and right that it'd be around 6-8% by now."
Linux users aren't switching to OS X left and right. A majority of Linux users run x86 architecture anyways, because it's cheap and plentiful. It's no hassle to throw together an x86 Linux desktop from free parts. Mac hardware is a little bit harder to come across. I use OS X, but I didn't stop using Linux or BSD for it. I simply used it where it fit best. There's nothing I can't do with it that I can do with Windows or Linux, but I still can't use the same application to get the same thing done b/w all of them. (at least not consistantly). I think it would be more to the point to say that the OSS community is embracing OSX as a truly unique member quite rapidly, but not as a replacement.
And we can only wish Linux had anywhere near 3% share. Perhaps in the server feild, but as a Desktop OS it's still probably behind MS-DOS in terms of market share.
You need to dislodge your head from your ass. This is NOTHING new. Locking files has been around since magnetic media. M$ is simply putting a feature into it's office suite that other suites have had for literally decades.
You're an idiot, and you made an idiot post. Yes, this kind of security is a good idea. At least it was a good idea 30 years ago, and it's ridiculous M$ is only now putting in such basic features.
"For example, where I work, we are required by law to have a level of security on certain information; this info should never be reaching people who do not fall under the same laws."
Ever heard of encryption? This is no fucking different, just aimed at fooling gullible jackasses such as yourself, and management, into thinking it's some new technology Microsoft invented.
Just so you know, critical thinking is very important once you get your head out of your ass and into reality.
Actually Gigabit ethernet runs slower than 32/33 PCI. Quite a bit slower. It's only slightly slower in thoery, but the difference is where PCI operates at or near a true 132MB/s, you will never see the theoretical peak of gigabit ethernet, just like you will never see the theoretical peak of 100baseT. Also, a PC-card like standard using AGP for it's I/O Bus instead of PCI could handle all the things you speak of. Also, don't forget with 1000BaseT latency is still in the ms's.. compare to ns over PCI/AGP...
It's completely possible to upgrade a computer with a closed up little card, just not financially feasible for manufactureres to produce or consumers to buy.
"MS is, in my view, breaking new ground with this; some people may not like what they are doing, but you have to admit that nobody else is putting this stuff into their OS (when there is clearly a need for it)."
Actually Unix and variants have been putting security into their OS for years.
Oh man, I remember how great those days were. Sitting for hours on end chatting away, playing door games, downloading shareware, adn:)(&(& )_& (*
*&_(P&*
(*()*+ *A+S)(*D+)( *
Anyone know the cheat codes to Legend of the Red Dragon? Zandorf14 is killing me while I sleep every night, and that damn bar wench still won't put out..
I just downloaded the pdf. I'm sure thousands of others have as well. If they manage to get a BS gag order, I'll happily send my archived copy to a web server outside the US.
It's a ridiculous scam, and if it works, that simply reflects the propensity of lack of true patriotism among those in charge.
I see your point, but it really comes down to what you define as support. I think the point of the AC's troll was that postgres and MySQL are still viable options, and as far as that goes, I agree.
Actually, the AC was quite right. While MySQL and Postgres do not have tools to define and populate OLAP data cubes, but alternatives exist for creating data cubes. So saying that they don't support data cubes is a inaccurate. They simply don't provide convenient tools to creating the data cubes. I refer you to EFEU, since that's what I for postgres datacubes. I can't remember the MySQL solution offhand, but it too supports data cubes.
Obviously you are an asshat. People don't want to mess with user names and passwords? Well you should rush this information to Microsoft who requires the administrator account in 2000/XP to have a password for ANY remote access. However as a Lindows user, I could easily install SSH or telnet with no password, effectively becoming a DDoS client for any script kiddy with a port scanner. This also means that if I've installed an exploitable program, it'll HAVE to be exploited as root.
I can almost accept that if a user doesn't REALLY doesn't want to mess with passwords they can go passwordless, but it is asinine to SUGGEST they do so.
No, you can not add users in single user mode. This is why it is called SINGLE user mode. A google search for multi user mode Lindows provides 0 useful links on information on how to get Lindows running in multi user mode. I think you're full of shit. Post a link proving yourself. Even if it is possible, You think someone making the switch is gonna have any idea how to pass parameters to his kernel at boot time? What would be the point of that anyways? All your permissions would still be fucked because root owns everything, readable, writeable, or executable and every combination thereof.
Your assertion that the default security schema is what determines a system's security is idiocy. An OS is no good without applications. And besides, Lindows does NOT have a strict iptables configuration. It is closer to Redhat's "medium" firewall.
I agreed Click'n'Run was easy to use, but so is rpm, apt, portage, insert any of the hundreds of autopackagers. Instead of using one of these, they created their own packaging system with no benefits and several drawbacks, simply for the sake of residual income. As I said.. I can understand this from a fiscal standpoint, but it's a "morally bankrupt" decision.
And as far as using a newbie distro like Mandrake,.. no thanks. I use real distros, not RedHat knock-offs. If I was suggesting a newbie distro, Lycoris wins hands down. Mandrake really has nothing unique to offer, but even it bests Lindows for a newbie.
All in all, your post was uninformed and your arguments were flimsy, at best.
No you can not add more users in single user mode. Nor can you exit single user mode in Lindows. You could "downlowad" Debian packages, after you install apt, from source. That's a bit much for someone trying to make the jump to windows. They're more likely to think that Linux sucks, based on the Lindows experience.
I would never suggest Lindows for ANYONE. Don't get me wrong, I really like the idea. I was super hyped about it being sold on cheap wal-mart PCs. Then I checked it out for myself. Here's what I found that I didn't like...
It always runs under single user mode. IRC somewhere, and you IRC as root. STUPID.
Click'n'Run doesn't work until you subscribe. Then you get to pay for all your software that you could have installed as easily with any other package manger, and a few commercial versions of free software.
That's where they went wrong IMHO. I can understand the financial reason for the Click'n'Run situation, but I see no justification for crippling Linux security to such an extent. I was hoping for a version of Linux that my Windows friends could use. Instead I got a generic version of Windows.
I work at an ISP and I can tell you this is the worst way possible to go about it. You don't need to remove one persons rights to protects anothers. Offer information on the who and the how of blocking kiddie porn sites and we'll all do it voluntarily. Using our network for illegal purposes is a strict violation of our TOS, if a user wants to see one of the sites he can call me up and justify it.
Blocking Kazaa is censorhsip, blocking child pornography is citizenship.
Yes, let's all move over to a windowing system with serious licensing issues that's designed from the ground up to be run on embedded devices. That sounds perfect.
And what is this "plan" to start phasing out X windows? Was there a meeting I missed? Last I checked X was still being heavily developed.
"I'm not saying we take drastic steps now, but we'd be stupid to take no steps to transition the desktop to QT all the way down."
This is ridiculous. We'd be stupid TO take steps to transition "the desktop" to Qt all the way down. You're the only one who wants this. Not everyone loves KDE, and even less people love Qt. The seperation of the windowing system and the actual desktop is what gives *nix users the configurability to give their desktops personality. If you want a one-size-fits-all desktop, get windows.
As for you're space shuttle comparison, X windows is not inherently big (at least is doesn't have to be). It's not old. As I said, it is still under development, and there have been recent releases. Having history doesn't make software old.
As far as I can see, you're the only one with your head in the sand. It sounds like you're regurgitating all the inaccurate FUD-based trolling that goes on any time an article related to X is posted.
Qt is in no way a replacement for X, and it never will be, in it's current form.
Whether or not the intentions of the authors were good or not makes no difference. It should ALWAYS be up to the end user to exercise good judgment in usage of information. In Kenpo, I was taught how to break bones and even kill people. I have yet to break anyone's bones, other than my own, nor have I killed anyone. Should I be punished for knowing these things? Should my teacher be punished for teaching me? No. If I chose to use my knowledge unfairly, should my teacher be punished for my irresponsibility?
The DMCA is the modern day non-racial equivalent of the Jim Crow laws. If you can keep "them" uneducated you can keep "them" under control.
Becuase RAID10 is just RAID1+0. So it's simply a striped array with RAID1 segments. RAID10 only has the fault tolerance of RAID1. RAID10 is only a solution for those considering RAID1, but they need additional performance. It is in no way a replacement for a true RAID5 array.
Also, you can get a hardware RAID10 Controller for about $50, so $120 is a ripoff.
Slashdot Mirror
I say OS X isn't competition for Linux or MS because as I said, OS X doesn't run on x86 hardware. This alone prevents it from truly competing with Windows or Linux.
As Joe User, I am out to buy a computer and see a Mac and a cheap wintel machine. The Mac costs twice as much. I ask the salesman, "What can I do on the expensive one that I can't do on the cheap one?". He replies with "They can do the same things". I'm going for the cheaper one (with more impressive marketable specs).
And saying OS X is no threat to Linux or MS is not off base. Until I can install OS X on my x86 machines, it is no threat to Windows or Linux, as it's not even an option.
I would have agreed with you on this a year or two ago, but Linux has grown enough since then that it can compete with the functionality of Windows as a desktop. OpenOffice is poised to be an MS Office killer. Those are the only two things MS makes a profit on. They lose tons of money everywhere else.
If Linux starts pecking away at their two cash cows, they won't be able to lose billions on a non profitable anti-competitive ventures. Their stranglehold on the market is loosened.
I know it's not happening overnight, but I think withing 5 years Linux could very well oust M$. 5 years is an eternity in the IT industry.
Think of how far Linux has come in the past 5 years. Now think how far M$ has come.
Never going to happen. The main reason being that OS X runs on apple's hardware, not x86. x86 hardware rules market share because it is cheap and readily available from a great number of merchants. Mac hardware is expensive and hard(er) to find.
:)
"Mac OS X is a single OS, as opposed to a set of OSes that may or may not work together."
OS X is no more a single OS than Linux is a single OS. Linux interoperates just fine with other Linux machines. Don't confuse the operating system with the applications.
"Also, OS X also has the backing of a long established company that will probably be around in the foreseeable future."
And Linux has IBM. At least they're not constantly going out of business
"OS X is also a BSD, which is a much better OS than Linux. "
Mod -1 Flamebait. BSD is not a better OS than Linux, nor is Linux better than BSD. Make your arguments based on credible facts, not personal opinion.
"Lastly, Apple is adopting a less proprietary model and much of the operating system is open source, so many of the benefits of a completely open source OS are there too."
A less proprietary model than Linux, where ALL of the OS is open source? I doubt that.
I like and use OS X, but it's not competition for Linux. It's a good OS, and has it's places, but it's no threat to Linux or MS.
cat document.txt | festival --tts!
I like using text to speech synthesis software such as Festival to have text read to me while I work. Granted it's not always the most articulate, it gets 99% of the job done just fine..
Buzzwords? Why don't you give me a single example of a buzzword I used.
You hide behind cowardly and false accusations in attempt to draw attention away from the fact that you have no clue what's going on.
" 1. I have been an MCSE for years, I passed it in two months w.o even studying hard. My experience was all that was necessary."
MCSE is worthless, and you make that clear. I am ashamed to be an MCSE. I'll happily brag about my other certs, but I am literally ashamed to be an MCSE. Ashamed that I was almost as clueless as you once.
"2. I am not going to become an expert on this shat unless I need to use it. I happen to work for a living, and have many other things that I need to be an expert on right now."
You already said you needed something like this for your line of work. Hypocrite.
"3. You use all the right buzz words. You must be a consultant or a tinkerer. Go back to reading your subscription to Linux User and PC World magazines. Maybe you can learn more buzz words to throw around."
I didn't use any buzzwords. I guess instead of using the proper terminology I should dumb it down for you and say things like "Microsoft is using this math stuff that makes it hard to read a file unless you know your math real good."
The more you say, the dumber you sound.
After reading your posts in response to mine and others, it has become blaringly obvious you are a complete and utter dipshit. Still working hard for your MCP I bet.
RMS is based solely on encryption and permission flags. Documents are converted into encrypted XrML, which an RMS enabled application can decrypt and interpret, and apply the proper permissions to.
To make it simple for your sake, this translates to:
Win 2K3 will use proprietary document formats.
This is not Palladium, this is not "Trusted Computing". This is an application dependant security measure. Really no different that password protecting a zip file.
So if I have read permission to a file, I can open up that file with Open Office or whatever application is first to reverse engineer the encryption and strip the XrML and copy the file as I see fit.
The idea that I couldn't still copy the binary, or simply the information from a screen grab is ridiculous. I just can't manipulate it within an RMS enabled application. If I have read permission to the binary, I can move it. If I can move it, I can manipulate it in any way I please.
Looks like you got suckered by the M$ propaganda machine, and like so many other clueless "Windows power users" you blindly throw all your faith in it with out understanding what it really even is.
You're a pathetic fool. I hope the company you work for realizes how usless you are and replaces you with inexpensive software.
Eh? Reason didn't write or publish this paper, they are just covering it. And other than that you were just rambling on. Perhaps you should take a vacation from slashdot for awhile..
"But I'd venture a guess that with OSX converting Linux users left and right that it'd be around 6-8% by now."
Linux users aren't switching to OS X left and right. A majority of Linux users run x86 architecture anyways, because it's cheap and plentiful. It's no hassle to throw together an x86 Linux desktop from free parts. Mac hardware is a little bit harder to come across. I use OS X, but I didn't stop using Linux or BSD for it. I simply used it where it fit best. There's nothing I can't do with it that I can do with Windows or Linux, but I still can't use the same application to get the same thing done b/w all of them. (at least not consistantly). I think it would be more to the point to say that the OSS community is embracing OSX as a truly unique member quite rapidly, but not as a replacement.
And we can only wish Linux had anywhere near 3% share. Perhaps in the server feild, but as a Desktop OS it's still probably behind MS-DOS in terms of market share.
You need to dislodge your head from your ass. This is NOTHING new. Locking files has been around since magnetic media. M$ is simply putting a feature into it's office suite that other suites have had for literally decades.
You're an idiot, and you made an idiot post. Yes, this kind of security is a good idea. At least it was a good idea 30 years ago, and it's ridiculous M$ is only now putting in such basic features.
"For example, where I work, we are required by law to have a level of security on certain information; this info should never be reaching people who do not fall under the same laws."
Ever heard of encryption? This is no fucking different, just aimed at fooling gullible jackasses such as yourself, and management, into thinking it's some new technology Microsoft invented.
Just so you know, critical thinking is very important once you get your head out of your ass and into reality.
Actually Gigabit ethernet runs slower than 32/33 PCI. Quite a bit slower. It's only slightly slower in thoery, but the difference is where PCI operates at or near a true 132MB/s, you will never see the theoretical peak of gigabit ethernet, just like you will never see the theoretical peak of 100baseT. Also, a PC-card like standard using AGP for it's I/O Bus instead of PCI could handle all the things you speak of. Also, don't forget with 1000BaseT latency is still in the ms's.. compare to ns over PCI/AGP...
It's completely possible to upgrade a computer with a closed up little card, just not financially feasible for manufactureres to produce or consumers to buy.
"MS is, in my view, breaking new ground with this; some people may not like what they are doing, but you have to admit that nobody else is putting this stuff into their OS (when there is clearly a need for it)."
Actually Unix and variants have been putting security into their OS for years.
Oh man, I remember how great those days were. Sitting for hours on end chatting away, playing door games, downloading shareware, adn :)(&(& )_& (*
*&_(P&*
(*()*+ *A+S)(*D+)( *
I(_A)SD*_)Id
+++
NO CARRIER
Anyone know the cheat codes to Legend of the Red Dragon? Zandorf14 is killing me while I sleep every night, and that damn bar wench still won't put out..
" I define support as that which the original product creators will accept the bug fixes for."
:)
heh. by that definition, none of M$ products have any support
I just downloaded the pdf. I'm sure thousands of others have as well. If they manage to get a BS gag order, I'll happily send my archived copy to a web server outside the US.
It's a ridiculous scam, and if it works, that simply reflects the propensity of lack of true patriotism among those in charge.
I see your point, but it really comes down to what you define as support. I think the point of the AC's troll was that postgres and MySQL are still viable options, and as far as that goes, I agree.
Actually, the AC was quite right. While MySQL and Postgres do not have tools to define and populate OLAP data cubes, but alternatives exist for creating data cubes. So saying that they don't support data cubes is a inaccurate. They simply don't provide convenient tools to creating the data cubes. I refer you to EFEU, since that's what I for postgres datacubes. I can't remember the MySQL solution offhand, but it too supports data cubes.
Obviously you are an asshat. People don't want to mess with user names and passwords? Well you should rush this information to Microsoft who requires the administrator account in 2000/XP to have a password for ANY remote access. However as a Lindows user, I could easily install SSH or telnet with no password, effectively becoming a DDoS client for any script kiddy with a port scanner. This also means that if I've installed an exploitable program, it'll HAVE to be exploited as root.
I can almost accept that if a user doesn't REALLY doesn't want to mess with passwords they can go passwordless, but it is asinine to SUGGEST they do so.
No, you can not add users in single user mode. This is why it is called SINGLE user mode. A google search for multi user mode Lindows
provides 0 useful links on information on how to get Lindows running in multi user mode. I think you're full of shit. Post a link proving yourself. Even if it is possible, You think someone making the switch is gonna have any idea how to pass parameters to his kernel at boot time? What would be the point of that anyways? All your permissions would still be fucked because root owns everything, readable, writeable, or executable and every combination thereof.
Your assertion that the default security schema is what determines a system's security is idiocy. An OS is no good without applications. And besides, Lindows does NOT have a strict iptables configuration. It is closer to Redhat's "medium" firewall.
I agreed Click'n'Run was easy to use, but so is rpm, apt, portage, insert any of the hundreds of autopackagers. Instead of using one of these, they created their own packaging system with no benefits and several drawbacks, simply for the sake of residual income. As I said.. I can understand this from a fiscal standpoint, but it's a "morally bankrupt" decision.
And as far as using a newbie distro like Mandrake,.. no thanks. I use real distros, not RedHat knock-offs. If I was suggesting a newbie distro, Lycoris wins hands down. Mandrake really has nothing unique to offer, but even it bests Lindows for a newbie.
All in all, your post was uninformed and your arguments were flimsy, at best.
No you can not add more users in single user mode. Nor can you exit single user mode in Lindows. You could "downlowad" Debian packages, after you install apt, from source. That's a bit much for someone trying to make the jump to windows. They're more likely to think that Linux sucks, based on the Lindows experience.
I would never suggest Lindows for ANYONE. Don't get me wrong, I really like the idea. I was super hyped about it being sold on cheap wal-mart PCs. Then I checked it out for myself. Here's what I found that I didn't like...
It always runs under single user mode. IRC somewhere, and you IRC as root. STUPID.
Click'n'Run doesn't work until you subscribe. Then you get to pay for all your software that you could have installed as easily with any other package manger, and a few commercial versions of free software.
That's where they went wrong IMHO. I can understand the financial reason for the Click'n'Run situation, but I see no justification for crippling Linux security to such an extent. I was hoping for a version of Linux that my Windows friends could use. Instead I got a generic version of Windows.
I work at an ISP and I can tell you this is the worst way possible to go about it. You don't need to remove one persons rights to protects anothers. Offer information on the who and the how of blocking kiddie porn sites and we'll all do it voluntarily. Using our network for illegal purposes is a strict violation of our TOS, if a user wants to see one of the sites he can call me up and justify it.
Blocking Kazaa is censorhsip, blocking child pornography is citizenship.
You: "I don't want my desktop to have "personality". I just want it to work!"
Me: "If you want a one-size-fits-all desktop, get windows."
Geesh, that one was a no brainer. RTFP.
"And here's the best
Having history doesn't make software old. "
It's obvious you have trouble making a distinction between history and old software. Let me put it in terms you can understand.
Commander Keen is old software. It isn't developed anymore, and hasn't been for awhile.
If a new Commander Keen came out, it would already have history, but it wouldn't be old
Hope I didn't go over your head with that one.
How did parent get modded to +5?
Yes, let's all move over to a windowing system with serious licensing issues that's designed from the ground up to be run on embedded devices. That sounds perfect.
And what is this "plan" to start phasing out X windows? Was there a meeting I missed? Last I checked X was still being heavily developed.
"I'm not saying we take drastic steps now, but we'd be stupid to take no steps to transition the desktop to QT all the way down."
This is ridiculous. We'd be stupid TO take steps to transition "the desktop" to Qt all the way down. You're the only one who wants this. Not everyone loves KDE, and even less people love Qt. The seperation of the windowing system and the actual desktop is what gives *nix users the configurability to give their desktops personality. If you want a one-size-fits-all desktop, get windows.
As for you're space shuttle comparison, X windows is not inherently big (at least is doesn't have to be). It's not old. As I said, it is still under development, and there have been recent releases. Having history doesn't make software old.
As far as I can see, you're the only one with your head in the sand. It sounds like you're regurgitating all the inaccurate FUD-based trolling that goes on any time an article related to X is posted.
Qt is in no way a replacement for X, and it never will be, in it's current form.
Whether or not the intentions of the authors were good or not makes no difference. It should ALWAYS be up to the end user to exercise good judgment in usage of information. In Kenpo, I was taught how to break bones and even kill people. I have yet to break anyone's bones, other than my own, nor have I killed anyone. Should I be punished for knowing these things? Should my teacher be punished for teaching me? No. If I chose to use my knowledge unfairly, should my teacher be punished for my irresponsibility?
The DMCA is the modern day non-racial equivalent of the Jim Crow laws. If you can keep "them" uneducated you can keep "them" under control.
Becuase RAID10 is just RAID1+0. So it's simply a striped array with RAID1 segments. RAID10 only has the fault tolerance of RAID1. RAID10 is only a solution for those considering RAID1, but they need additional performance. It is in no way a replacement for a true RAID5 array.
Also, you can get a hardware RAID10 Controller for about $50, so $120 is a ripoff.