It is long overdue. Even a more niche distro needs to have the option to simply and quickly install the base system.
Now if I was installing it everyday I'd remember the steps required, but I do an install every 6 months to a year. As much as I like control, as long as I have the option to quickly remove the cruft I don't want (or not install it in the first place) then I'd prefer a good installer.
Anyway, rather than re-invent the wheel maybe they could look at Anaconda? (Fedora/Red Hat installer)
Now I know that identical twins are 100% identical, but there are some who are close. How does such a system cope with identical twins? they are after all two different people.
They find a method that is more efficient and produces less Co2, but produces nuclear waste instead.
I'd sooner have the Co2 thanks, at least we can try and deal with that, nobody seems to know what to do about nuclear waste other than bury it. In fact research is being done into burying Co2.
While using WMV on Linux will probably break the end user license, lets not forget that Microsoft have been found to be breaking laws with their anti-competitive practises.
So such licenses are questionable. You have a computer hardware to run it, you have the software required to decode the files. Why should you be forced to buy and use a specific operating system to do the job? especially if there's a free alternative that is better.
It's politics like this that make me think about taking up another interest.
Fair enough, I was under the impression it was X based. But still, compared with Windows I would estimate Apple have written less of their OS than Microsoft has.
I'm not critical of Apple for utilising open source and Unix code, it's a very fine idea. But what I am critical of is the notion that Apple are so much more creative and forward thinking than Microsoft, this isn't the case. Both are large organisations that rely on the ideas of other smaller companies.
I personally think the lack of ideas is proven by the photo iPod which is a very minor tweak to an existing product and provides very little extra "wow". I'd have been more impressed if they could have shrunk the unit, improved the battery life etc...
It's not like they were even thinking about making an mp3 player until someone pitched the idea to them.
Apple have no vision beyond making already established ideas better. They're no better than Microsoft in terms of innovation. Microsoft tends to let other people release products, analyse why they suceed/fail and then improve them in some way.
Apple do the same, but tend to focus on simplicity and the visual design. They like the "cool" factor that makes their products appeal to designers and the in-crowd.
In fact, OSX follows this concept. They've taken already written software (kernel, X windows etc), improved it and grafted a slick interface on the front.
Nobody said you can burn GD-ROMs or GC format discs, however you can burn discs which will be loaded by the consoles.
With the DC people used the DC console to read the data from the unit (using a network cable connected to a PC) ripped out the movies and burned onto a normal CDR.
What does this figure actually refer to though? the kernel? KDE, X, Gnome?
If it's just the kernel then why hasn't any action been brought? simply because the kernel team have no money to syphon off, companies like SCO would rather sue their competitors to hamper their business.
Currently Microsoft has more cases against them about patents and other alleged violations than any of the open source community.
Thing is, if you bought an iPod it shows you're more inclined to buy well designed (visually) simple products.
The fact that you bought an iPod and not some of the more feature rich players shows that you wanted something that did the job with little fuss. Macs do this too.
We're using Sun One App server for a project and it's a fairly dreadful application server. Slow, clunky and just on the whole inferior to Apache Tomcat (even though Sun One is based on Tomcat)
Solaris might be supported and have some enterprise friendly funtionality, but it's also rather archaic. Some of it's daemons are rather old and needlessly installed.
Linux has JFS, XFS and Reiserfs, so don't tell me it doesn't have any decent filesystems. The performance of 2.6 is great, beats all the BSDs and i'm sure it would beat Solaris.
As for security, this is a problem definately, but it's up to the vendors to harden their products, this (and support) is what you pay your license fees for when you buy Red Hat. But since Sun now ships with Gnome and has all the GNU software I can't see how Solaris on the whole is much more secure. It all comes down to the kernel.
Ironic that Microsoft advocate the choice of software based on its merits rather than just jumping on the open-source bandwagon. Then they basically say not to choose software other than Microsoft as we'll sue you.
Surely Microsoft should target the vendor not the recipient of the software? that is if there's anything but FUD in their argument.
Slashdot Mirror
It is long overdue. Even a more niche distro needs to have the option to simply and quickly install the base system.
Now if I was installing it everyday I'd remember the steps required, but I do an install every 6 months to a year. As much as I like control, as long as I have the option to quickly remove the cruft I don't want (or not install it in the first place) then I'd prefer a good installer.
Anyway, rather than re-invent the wheel maybe they could look at Anaconda? (Fedora/Red Hat installer)
Some OSes/browsers come with a tool to keep hold on them. I'd sooner have that info on my computer than have a single login to all manner of sites.
Now I know that identical twins are 100% identical, but there are some who are close. How does such a system cope with identical twins? they are after all two different people.
They'd be foolish to try and restrict access to educational software for children.
:)
(Tongue in cheek) Mind you if kids lose out on a good education they might be dumb enough to keep buying Microsoft software
They find a method that is more efficient and produces less Co2, but produces nuclear waste instead.
I'd sooner have the Co2 thanks, at least we can try and deal with that, nobody seems to know what to do about nuclear waste other than bury it. In fact research is being done into burying Co2.
I just dislike paying over the odds for TV shows that have long broken even and make the TV studio fat wads of cash.
Anything from the 80s such as A-Team, Airwolf or Knight Rider has made the studio loads.
1. Make matter creation device
2. Create gold and diamonds
3. Profit!
Alternately, make a Rolex and tell those spammers to get lost!
Definitely and when you see the ludicrous cost of DVD boxsets for some TV shows you can see why.
While using WMV on Linux will probably break the end user license, lets not forget that Microsoft have been found to be breaking laws with their anti-competitive practises.
So such licenses are questionable. You have a computer hardware to run it, you have the software required to decode the files. Why should you be forced to buy and use a specific operating system to do the job? especially if there's a free alternative that is better.
It's politics like this that make me think about taking up another interest.
Fair enough, I was under the impression it was X based. But still, compared with Windows I would estimate Apple have written less of their OS than Microsoft has.
I'm not critical of Apple for utilising open source and Unix code, it's a very fine idea. But what I am critical of is the notion that Apple are so much more creative and forward thinking than Microsoft, this isn't the case. Both are large organisations that rely on the ideas of other smaller companies.
I personally think the lack of ideas is proven by the photo iPod which is a very minor tweak to an existing product and provides very little extra "wow". I'd have been more impressed if they could have shrunk the unit, improved the battery life etc...
It's not like they were even thinking about making an mp3 player until someone pitched the idea to them.
Apple have no vision beyond making already established ideas better. They're no better than Microsoft in terms of innovation. Microsoft tends to let other people release products, analyse why they suceed/fail and then improve them in some way.
Apple do the same, but tend to focus on simplicity and the visual design. They like the "cool" factor that makes their products appeal to designers and the in-crowd.
In fact, OSX follows this concept. They've taken already written software (kernel, X windows etc), improved it and grafted a slick interface on the front.
Well it sounds like this is an empty threat from Microsoft. IBM would have quite a lot of patents to use against Microsoft.
The areas i'd consider dubious in the kernel tend to be Microsoft related, SMBFS, NTFS, VFAT. So mostly it's file systems.
There were computers in 1873, except they were people not electronic. Their job was to compute log tables.
Games, photos etc are of dubious value. I can play games on my mobile phone, view pictures on my PDA (which has a 4 inch VGA screen).
TV output but no digital audio output? crazy!!
Are you sure?
Most branded PCs these days ship with a two button wheel mouse, USB2, Firewire, TV-Out, 5.1 audio outputs, 100/1GB Lan, TFT screen, DVD writer.
WMV/ASF
Radio
Mic Recording
Direct encoding (line in)
LCD remote
FLAC codec
OGG Vorbis codec
Nobody said you can burn GD-ROMs or GC format discs, however you can burn discs which will be loaded by the consoles.
With the DC people used the DC console to read the data from the unit (using a network cable connected to a PC) ripped out the movies and burned onto a normal CDR.
What does this figure actually refer to though? the kernel? KDE, X, Gnome?
If it's just the kernel then why hasn't any action been brought? simply because the kernel team have no money to syphon off, companies like SCO would rather sue their competitors to hamper their business.
Currently Microsoft has more cases against them about patents and other alleged violations than any of the open source community.
Thing is, if you bought an iPod it shows you're more inclined to buy well designed (visually) simple products.
The fact that you bought an iPod and not some of the more feature rich players shows that you wanted something that did the job with little fuss. Macs do this too.
That's exactly the person I was going to quote. Basically leaving your phone in a car on a hot sunny day is enough.
Search engines are like a map of the Internet, all the seedier parts of the net are there, or would they rather have the net censored?
We've had this "forced" on us due to the hardware being supplied by Sun.
It works, it's just clunky and the performance leaves a bit to be desired.
Don't get me started on Oracle OLAP lol.
CRTs will still use more power and emit radiation. Your health is better with LCD, faster technology is coming too, much faster ns not ms refresh.
We're using Sun One App server for a project and it's a fairly dreadful application server. Slow, clunky and just on the whole inferior to Apache Tomcat (even though Sun One is based on Tomcat)
Solaris might be supported and have some enterprise friendly funtionality, but it's also rather archaic. Some of it's daemons are rather old and needlessly installed.
Linux has JFS, XFS and Reiserfs, so don't tell me it doesn't have any decent filesystems. The performance of 2.6 is great, beats all the BSDs and i'm sure it would beat Solaris.
As for security, this is a problem definately, but it's up to the vendors to harden their products, this (and support) is what you pay your license fees for when you buy Red Hat. But since Sun now ships with Gnome and has all the GNU software I can't see how Solaris on the whole is much more secure. It all comes down to the kernel.
Ironic that Microsoft advocate the choice of software based on its merits rather than just jumping on the open-source bandwagon. Then they basically say not to choose software other than Microsoft as we'll sue you.
Surely Microsoft should target the vendor not the recipient of the software? that is if there's anything but FUD in their argument.
It just shows how desperate they are becoming.