I believe that is what confuses people about the whole monitor height issue. Most people do slouch a bit, to the point that your head is tilted down slightly, to look at a monitor which is above your head in a sea-level sense, but at a down-angle from eye-level.
Where did you get the idea that it's bad ergonomically to look up at your screen?
OSHA says so. Even without OSHA, it's far more comfortable to sit up straight in a nice chair with my head tilted slightly down. Having it tilted slightly up hurts my shoulders after a few hours (fighting against gravity and all). When you read a book for hours on end, do you hold it up above eye level or down in your lap?
All this time I thought it was that leather trenchcoat making Laurence Fishburne look so cool. I need a mental shower now to clean the image of Bill Gates in a long leather coat.
GPL != free source via download. GPL == anyone who has had the binaries distributed to them is entitled to the source for no more than the cost of the storage medium and the shipping.
if they offer to pay people to cause you physical harm, then yes. If they knowingly distribute false information (libel/slander), then yes. If they state everything they say is opinion or provide factual data, and don't offer to pay people to hurt you or damage your property, then that's free speech and is protected.
interesting. I don't see any indication on the product page that that is the case. Can you point to any articles or reviews that talk about the legal issues? (Not asking as a challenge to back it up, just would like to know more).
Does it have to be burned up/crashed into the ocean? Is it not possible to bring it back safely, and put it on display in a museum? I know it would be expensive, but it seems like Hubble has had a significant enough role in astronomy to try and preserve it.
I just heard a lady on the radio yesterday morning, can't remember her name though, who is suing either studio, the Wachowski brothers, or both, for copyright infringement over the first Matrix movie. She wrote a book and a movie treatment a few years back, and was turned down because the tehcnology for the fx weren't there. She said the FBI was brought in to investigate the claims and concluded that every major character in the movie came straight out of her book. This would certainly explain the last two seemed to resort to such tripe, as the suit only mentions the first movie.
You are apparently not aware that with NT, 2K, XP, and probably 2K3, there is the Event Viewer, which logs such things as user logins, drivers being loaded, and various other important info like that. I freely admit to not being able to comment on Windows 95/98/ME, though.
A hacking attempt should have a well documented time, and if the defendent can show they were doing something else at the time they should get a non guilty verdict easily.
That's right, because there is no such thing as batch jobs and scheduled tasks. Any "expert" witness the prosecution calls upon to talk about such things must be getting bribed to do so.
It's unfortunate that there are people who will hold malice against others in this situation. It's not Red Hat's fault they used the product in a fashion they weren't told it would work well in.
The funny part is, fedora.us implements the same stable/testing/unstable trichotomy as Debian. I'm sure you're aware that Red Hat basically teamed up with fedora.us to create the Fedora distribution. So I think it's reasonable to expect that the same trichotomy (I like that word) will materialize in Fedora. Red Hat is notorious for their.0 releases, and this is the 1.0 release of this distribution.
Apt and yum are so much easier, I frankly haven't/don't use rh-conf-pck, but it's giving Fedora a lot of bad press with the OS/News crowd.
No argument here. The major problem I see with it, is that it has a set list of packages that you can add/remove with it. That is likely the cause of dependency problems that people are encountering. If the dependency isn't listed in the db created by the comps rpm, it just errors out. Synaptic is certainly the best GUI I've seen in this case. I'd wager that when apt is included as an official part of the distribution, synaptic will be too.
On your first point about derivative works, I fail to see how SCO could wind up owning Linux or blocking it's distribution. The most that could happen is certain versions of the Linux kernel would be illegal to distribute in the U.S., and IBM would pay a fine, possible people who disitrubted the offending versions of the Linux kernel too.
Regarding the second point, if the GPL is deemed to be public domain, then SCO will have willfully distributed the offending code into the public domain, by disitrubting it under the GPL after stating that their copywritten code was in the Linux kernel. They announced publically that they knew it was there, and made it available on their FTP site under the GPL. That would come to light during IBM's countersuit, and shouldn't have bearing on SCO's suit for contract violation against IBM. The end result being that there are no offending versions of the Linux kernel, as any appropriated code is public domain.
I'm glad you made that comparison. I see Fedora as being the Red Hat equivalent of Debian unstable. Red Hat has had enormous community support in the past, and I feel confident that the developers who see this as inviting the community to participate will continue to support it. I think you might even see more developers support it. Even if not accepted as an official package, there will be packaging guidelines to follow, just like there are in Debian (and presumably in Gentoo, I'm not familiar with it), and individuals can setup their own apt and/or yum repos to simplify distribution of those packages. And any developer who is already maintaining dpkg and ebuild versions of their software shouldn't have much trouble writing a spec file to build an rpm.
The other thing to consider is that RH engineers have been mentioning, on the mailing lists, work to unify the repository header formats. So that as a developer you just have a repository, and apt, yum, and up2date, (and I'm sure emerge too) can all read dependencies from that one source. Hopefully that will facilitate the spread of packages which are disitribution agnostic.
Well, the truth is Fedora is being marketed to developers. The front page of redhat.com says "for developers or enthusiasts who want the latest technology." To be honest, I don't think Red Hat has ever truly been marketed for home desktop use. I can remember official statements along those line back in the 6.x days too. But as a home user (I don't do any development on my home machine, so I think I can evaluate it as a user) I think this move is more comfortable. I always hated having to go to choose between the RedHat packaged version or the version pacakged by the people developing the code. You don't go to microsoft.com for WinZip, why should you be expected to go to redhat.com for Mplayer. For example, wine used to be included with RH. The wine folks also provide RPMs for RedHat. They are configured differently, and the wine people assume you use their package. So if you have the RH one and go asking for config help from the wine forums, you might be told to install the winhq version. That's not user-friendly. Knowing that I just have to have the Fedora Extras repo added to my apt, yum, or up2date sources and I magically get the official winehq wine makes me a more satisfied user. Note that I just used wine as an example, I don't think Fedora Extras has actually started yet.
up2date supports apt and yum repositories. The default up2date config is to use yum repos on fedora.redhat.com, should have specified that. Yum itself is an officiaal pacakge in Fedora, apt is in the works, from what I could tell on the fedora-test-list.
I don't think the courts would have authority to arbitrarily strip the copyright holders of their copyrights like that, at least they shouldn't if they do. Even so, SCO was making the code available under the GPL for free download for months after-the-fact, so such a ruling would mean that SCO's secret IP would have become public domain too.
Don't trust Eugenia, either. She's been known to hold vendettas. I've seen her first hand make threats on RH beta lists of giving a bad review for not resolving certain bugs the way she wanted them to be (not as in they weren't fixed, but as in they weren't fixed the way she wanted them to be). She's totally exagerating half the problems she mentioned. I personally haven't seen one of them with a default installation. The flash player and java plugin have worked with every version of mozilla and firebird (moz 1.4.1 and 1.5, fb 0.6.1 and 0.7) I've tried. The redhat-config-packages application can get a little confused sometimes, which is unfortunate. But her report of the RPMs having broken dependencies is wrong. the command-line tool, yum, and apt/synaptic all work just dandy.
Szulik's stance is that desktop Linux simply doesn't exist at all
If that's the case then why do they market a workstation configuration of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. I believe Mr. Szulik's stance is that Linux is not ready for the home desktop, but is quite capable for a corporate desktop where you don't need to support the 5 hour old video codec of the day.
Realise that the transition to Fedora means people developing software can now also be the maintainer of the official package distributed in Fedora. Think about that. The mplayer maintainer can pacakge mplayer to go in an official Fedora non-Free yum or apt repo now (because Fedora has native support for yum and apt out-of-box). Or the gaim folks can package the gaim RPM on the Fedora Core CD images. How is that anything but awesome. You won't have to run around looking for those special RedHat RPMs for package foo made by Joe Random Hacker. On top of that, you still get the anaconda installer and all the sweet config tools, still maintained on Red Hat's payroll. Red Hat is not abandoning the community, they are embracing the community.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe that is what confuses people about the whole monitor height issue. Most people do slouch a bit, to the point that your head is tilted down slightly, to look at a monitor which is above your head in a sea-level sense, but at a down-angle from eye-level.
OSHA says so. Even without OSHA, it's far more comfortable to sit up straight in a nice chair with my head tilted slightly down. Having it tilted slightly up hurts my shoulders after a few hours (fighting against gravity and all). When you read a book for hours on end, do you hold it up above eye level or down in your lap?
All this time I thought it was that leather trenchcoat making Laurence Fishburne look so cool. I need a mental shower now to clean the image of Bill Gates in a long leather coat.
GPL != free source via download. GPL == anyone who has had the binaries distributed to them is entitled to the source for no more than the cost of the storage medium and the shipping.
if they offer to pay people to cause you physical harm, then yes. If they knowingly distribute false information (libel/slander), then yes. If they state everything they say is opinion or provide factual data, and don't offer to pay people to hurt you or damage your property, then that's free speech and is protected.
interesting. I don't see any indication on the product page that that is the case. Can you point to any articles or reviews that talk about the legal issues? (Not asking as a challenge to back it up, just would like to know more).
slashdot covered HP's announcement of a cheap desktop with Madrake 9.1 pre-installed.
Does it have to be burned up/crashed into the ocean? Is it not possible to bring it back safely, and put it on display in a museum? I know it would be expensive, but it seems like Hubble has had a significant enough role in astronomy to try and preserve it.
protester: Free Tibet! Free Tibet
Peter: I'll take it! Hello, China? I have something I think you want, but it'll cost you. That's right, all the tea.
thank god someone else has finally said it.
I just heard a lady on the radio yesterday morning, can't remember her name though, who is suing either studio, the Wachowski brothers, or both, for copyright infringement over the first Matrix movie. She wrote a book and a movie treatment a few years back, and was turned down because the tehcnology for the fx weren't there. She said the FBI was brought in to investigate the claims and concluded that every major character in the movie came straight out of her book. This would certainly explain the last two seemed to resort to such tripe, as the suit only mentions the first movie.
You are apparently not aware that with NT, 2K, XP, and probably 2K3, there is the Event Viewer, which logs such things as user logins, drivers being loaded, and various other important info like that. I freely admit to not being able to comment on Windows 95/98/ME, though.
That's right, because there is no such thing as batch jobs and scheduled tasks. Any "expert" witness the prosecution calls upon to talk about such things must be getting bribed to do so.
It's unfortunate that there are people who will hold malice against others in this situation. It's not Red Hat's fault they used the product in a fashion they weren't told it would work well in.
The funny part is, fedora.us implements the same stable/testing/unstable trichotomy as Debian. I'm sure you're aware that Red Hat basically teamed up with fedora.us to create the Fedora distribution. So I think it's reasonable to expect that the same trichotomy (I like that word) will materialize in Fedora. Red Hat is notorious for their .0 releases, and this is the 1.0 release of this distribution.
No argument here. The major problem I see with it, is that it has a set list of packages that you can add/remove with it. That is likely the cause of dependency problems that people are encountering. If the dependency isn't listed in the db created by the comps rpm, it just errors out. Synaptic is certainly the best GUI I've seen in this case. I'd wager that when apt is included as an official part of the distribution, synaptic will be too.
Regarding the second point, if the GPL is deemed to be public domain, then SCO will have willfully distributed the offending code into the public domain, by disitrubting it under the GPL after stating that their copywritten code was in the Linux kernel. They announced publically that they knew it was there, and made it available on their FTP site under the GPL. That would come to light during IBM's countersuit, and shouldn't have bearing on SCO's suit for contract violation against IBM. The end result being that there are no offending versions of the Linux kernel, as any appropriated code is public domain.
The other thing to consider is that RH engineers have been mentioning, on the mailing lists, work to unify the repository header formats. So that as a developer you just have a repository, and apt, yum, and up2date, (and I'm sure emerge too) can all read dependencies from that one source. Hopefully that will facilitate the spread of packages which are disitribution agnostic.
Well, the truth is Fedora is being marketed to developers. The front page of redhat.com says "for developers or enthusiasts who want the latest technology." To be honest, I don't think Red Hat has ever truly been marketed for home desktop use. I can remember official statements along those line back in the 6.x days too. But as a home user (I don't do any development on my home machine, so I think I can evaluate it as a user) I think this move is more comfortable. I always hated having to go to choose between the RedHat packaged version or the version pacakged by the people developing the code. You don't go to microsoft.com for WinZip, why should you be expected to go to redhat.com for Mplayer. For example, wine used to be included with RH. The wine folks also provide RPMs for RedHat. They are configured differently, and the wine people assume you use their package. So if you have the RH one and go asking for config help from the wine forums, you might be told to install the winhq version. That's not user-friendly. Knowing that I just have to have the Fedora Extras repo added to my apt, yum, or up2date sources and I magically get the official winehq wine makes me a more satisfied user. Note that I just used wine as an example, I don't think Fedora Extras has actually started yet.
up2date supports apt and yum repositories. The default up2date config is to use yum repos on fedora.redhat.com, should have specified that. Yum itself is an officiaal pacakge in Fedora, apt is in the works, from what I could tell on the fedora-test-list.
I don't think the courts would have authority to arbitrarily strip the copyright holders of their copyrights like that, at least they shouldn't if they do. Even so, SCO was making the code available under the GPL for free download for months after-the-fact, so such a ruling would mean that SCO's secret IP would have become public domain too.
Don't trust Eugenia, either. She's been known to hold vendettas. I've seen her first hand make threats on RH beta lists of giving a bad review for not resolving certain bugs the way she wanted them to be (not as in they weren't fixed, but as in they weren't fixed the way she wanted them to be). She's totally exagerating half the problems she mentioned. I personally haven't seen one of them with a default installation. The flash player and java plugin have worked with every version of mozilla and firebird (moz 1.4.1 and 1.5, fb 0.6.1 and 0.7) I've tried. The redhat-config-packages application can get a little confused sometimes, which is unfortunate. But her report of the RPMs having broken dependencies is wrong. the command-line tool, yum, and apt/synaptic all work just dandy.
If that's the case then why do they market a workstation configuration of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. I believe Mr. Szulik's stance is that Linux is not ready for the home desktop, but is quite capable for a corporate desktop where you don't need to support the 5 hour old video codec of the day.
Realise that the transition to Fedora means people developing software can now also be the maintainer of the official package distributed in Fedora. Think about that. The mplayer maintainer can pacakge mplayer to go in an official Fedora non-Free yum or apt repo now (because Fedora has native support for yum and apt out-of-box). Or the gaim folks can package the gaim RPM on the Fedora Core CD images. How is that anything but awesome. You won't have to run around looking for those special RedHat RPMs for package foo made by Joe Random Hacker. On top of that, you still get the anaconda installer and all the sweet config tools, still maintained on Red Hat's payroll. Red Hat is not abandoning the community, they are embracing the community.
Red Hat became profitable by successfully marketing their Enterprise [support] offerings, not through retail editions sold at Best Buy.