This isn't a very good comparison. In the one case you're talking about an OpenGL game that runs native on both platforms, and in the other you're talking about a D3D game that can only run in Linux through emulation.
That said, the reviews I've read about Doom3 on Linux say its performance is not as good as on Windows.
Does anybody have any experience with running HL2 on linux? How does it fare against the Win version on same hardware?
I haven't tried it yet. But I did read a review that claimed it was quite good. The reviewer had some trouble at first, but after a bit of tweaking said it worked perfectly, albeit at a very few frames/sec slower than it ran on Windows. My guess is that even that will ultimately be fixed; I basically quit gaming a couple years back, but I used to have a dual-booting box that ran counterstrike several fps faster in Linux than it did in Windows. Same hardware.
The opengl-only mac part of this is a great point. It's odd...nobody seems to question the logic of putting out games for the mac.....but more Linux desktops were sold last year than macs, and apparently that userbase is just "way too small" for anybody to find interesting.
Why can't someone port the Direct3D API to Linux? This would save a lot of hassle of porting the games to OpenGL.
It's not so much that no one can...just that it's way too much trouble for the benefits you'd get. Specifically, D3D relies heavily on a lot of the rest of the Win32 API. If you want D3D, you'll need either a Win32 API, or to rewrite all those calls. This makes sense in the context of wine, which is why cedega/winex have basically done all this. Not perfectly, mind you...but this is their goal.
Of course, you can add to this the fact that Linux already has perfectly good API's for this sort of thing in the form of OpenGL and SDL. And the fact that Microsoft has kept D3D a moving target.
And finally, there's the fact that porting D3D wouldn't necessarily solve all the problems; presumably, games that use D3D also make a bunch of other Win32 system calls. So, you're back to needing both D3D and Win32.
In other words, you might as well have said, "why doesn't somebody just port Windows to Linux so we can forget about all this bullshit?"
Despite the admonition to not quarrel with a fool (folks might not be able to tell who's who), I'll bite.
why would you want to run linux when xp tablet edition is pretty awesome and well-tested and integrated with other existing microsoft products?
First, I think your unsupported claims of XP's "awesome" and "well-tested" nature are quite amusing. I'll leave "awesome" alone because of its absolutely subjective nature, but I'll still note that I disagree, and feel instead that it "sucks." About "well-tested" though...how many remote root exploits were discovered for XP within the first quarter-year of its release?
here's the thing about open source - as soon as it becomes big, microsoft will adapt and still rule the world.
I must have missed the memo detailing that Microsoft currently rules the world. However, much more pertinent in my opinion is the question of their adaptation. Because clearly, open source has become big. One system runs the majority of the Internet. It's not Windows. As for the adaptation issue, I'm interested to hear what you think they might do. Because clearly, they haven't got any ideas yet...flailing about wildly and talking about how OSS is "cancer" doesn't count, and neither do advertisements about how 7-11 figured out that Windows on x86 was cheaper than Linux on mainframes. BTW, in case anyone was wondering, it is also more expensive to buy a Ferrari to go through the McDonald's drive-through than it is to take a cab to the nicest eatery in town.
how hard would it be for microsoft to emulate the best of open source's features and integrate it with every other microsoft product? not very hard, especially when you have billions of dollars and some of the world's best programmers that actually get paid for coding.
First, Microsoft does not have nearly as many programmers on its payroll as there are OSS programmers working on Linux-centric projects. Second, they don't spend nearly as much money paying their coders as the rest of the corporate world spends combined on Linux-centric development. So, instead of your "not very hard" analysis, I'd say "pretty much fucking impossible." And finally, if this isn't very hard, then why has the pace of OSS development clearly been outstripping what MS is capable of over the last decade or so? I mean, in 1995 the comparison between Linux and Windows was truly laughable. I started with Linux in 1998, and it wasn't even close to viable. Now, I find Linux much more usable and capable than Windows, to the point where I have one Windows installation left; a 10% chunk of my laptop harddrive, which booted less than 5 times in 2004. We were playing catchup for a while. Those days are past. We have not seen this alleged "adaptation." And we won't.
the movement will die as soon as people realize they're getting paid nothing and will always be paid nothing to create an inferior product.
Sorry, but this "movement" has been around pretty much exactly as long as computers have. In fact, Microsoft's model is much younger. Likewise, I don't think it's OSS whose model is passing into the crucible; it's Microsofts. We are about to find out whether proprietary software can really work. I think the answer is "no."
Also, you completely ignore the fact that many large companies are paying OSS developers.
but don't worry, microsoft's monopoly power is waning so we really have nothing to worry about.
Oh, never mind. I'm not sure why I replied. This poster was clearly simply under the influence of LSD.
Sorry, I have no idea how to make your computer run like it did yesterday.
Bwahahahah! That's classic. And yeah, that's one that escaped the list..."I can be reasonably sure that when I wake up tomorrow, my computer will not have totally fucked up for no readily-apparent or adequately explicable reason."
More often, I've found myself upset that the hardware manufacturers fail to support linux... Wireless support is a good example of this.
No, wireless support is nearly the only remaining example of this. The wifi manufacturers are stuck in a tight spot, because FCC regulations (and perhaps their analogue in other countries) prohibit them from allowing users access to the parts of the software that control the frequencies and power output of the radio. So open sourcing the drivers is a legal impossibility. Most of them these days have already produced some Linux support anyway, like Atheros with its small binary hardware abstraction layer, which keeps the secrets hidden. And of course, for those of you who have the truly-unsupported broadcom 54g chips, or something similar, don't forget NDISWrapper...it may not be the most idealistic thing ever, but it sure gets you on the network.
Other than very narrow instances like this, hardware support for Linux is great. Let's try not to lose sight of the fact that Linux has many times the hardware support of Windows. Ever try running Windows on an Alpha? What about MIPS? Thought not.
it's all native driver support (except the nVidia module).
The NVidia driver is native.
Also, while I run Gentoo most of the time also, hardware detection does not "generally blow." It is in fact much more sophisticated than, say, the hardware detection in WindowsXP.
the middleware of autoconfig and setup routines never seems to work properly.
Dammit! This is the part that just makes me crazy! "never" seems to work? Are you fucking kidding? Don't you see?.....like 98% of the time, it just works right. Out of the box. I'm counting the people who didn't check to see if it was muted as working right. But seriously, the amount of time that sound doesn't work on hardware that isn't completely exotic is crazy low. In my experience, it's lower than Windows by a long shot...Windows has many, many fewer sound drivers built in, and if yours didn't make the cut you'll need to go find 3rd party drivers. And even if it did make the cut (or even if you did get the drivers) there's still a small percentage that is going to cause problems. Again, its just a case of everybody giving Windows every benefit of every doubt, and then complaining because Linux doesn't rise to some other more perfect standard.
Oh, and midi drivers are often crap on both platforms.
Even some of the better distros at hardware detection like SuSE, Mandrake and Yellowdog have community forums filled with regulars who love using the OS, yet still don't have everything working.
You haven't ever been to the Windows forums? And seen the thousands of people having problems getting things working on Windows?
Seriously, I'm tired of people bitching about how "sometimes things just don't work." I haven't found a system yet that didn't give somebody a pain in his ass. But these days, well over 90% of the time, I can have a Linux distribution up and fully functional many, many times faster than any of you out there can get an XP box to that same level. And I'm talking about experienced Windows installers here. Anybody who bitches about Linux being hard to install has either never had to install Windows, has completely forgotten what a pain it was, or is just outright lying.
P.S. If you are really using Linux, and are actually having trouble getting things to work, post a reply with the functionality in question and a way for me to get in touch with you. We'll get it fixed up in a jiffy.
Clinton was impeached for perjury, not for lying per se. Typical liberal spin.
Typically conservative ignorance. The federal perjury statute defines the felony as lying about a "material point" which is elsewhere defined as a point having an impact on the matter under scrutiny in the case. Considering that the question of whether Clinton got a BJ had absolutely nothing to do with any of the charges he was discussing with that grand jury that day, it was as immaterial as a question about what he had for breakfast that morning. It was never even close to questionable whether that was a chargeable offense.
Clinton was impeached for an act that was unquestionably not a crime, and any trial lawyer will tell you the same.
Perhaps it's better to just bite the bullet and accept that Microsoft have come up with something pretty good.
With an attitude like that, we'd never have Linux in the first place. You're proposing a chicken-egg problem: "don't bother with Linux, because there's no support...since there's nobody bothering with Linux, why support it?" It's probably not entirely ready on tablets yet....but it wasn't entirely ready for servers in 1992 either. Those of us who aren't ready to accept the mediocre results handed to us by the single source of proprietary mainstream system software feel it's more reasonable to "bite the bullet" in a different way, helping try to improve software which may begin as inferior, but has much more potential for growth into something really cool.
And for the record, this situation is a lot simpler than the one we were looking at in '92. Given the results of that, I'd watch out for these tablets. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon, and for the rest of your life.
Damn, I quit too soon. I forgot to mention all the cool things my laptop can do that it wouldn't be able to if it ran windows:
1)I can update all my software with one command. Windows Update will only handle OS components.
2)I can install nearly any piece of software from one unified interface. In Windows, I need to go hunting for the software and install it whatever way the developer chose.
3)I can personally control my processor speed and the criteria for speedstepping. Windows will not allow this.
4)I can choose any window and ask it to always stay on top. In Windows there are some windows that always stay on top, but you can't choose which ones they are.
5)I can choose any of the last 25 blocks of text I've selected to fill my clipboard buffer. The whole cut/paste situation is much more sophisticated in KDE.
6)I can run web/ftp/mail servers. If you want to do this with Windows, you'll need to either buy the expensive MS offerings, or go get Apache and thank the same geeks you are dissing.
7)I can remotely access both Windows Terminal Services and VNC, or run a VNC server. This will require 3rd party software in windows.
8)I can play DVDs. Again, 3rd party software does this for windows.
9)I can burn CDs. Same story.
10)I can take a blank hard drive, write DOS partitions to it, and format it for FAT32, in any size, in under 1 minute. WindowsXP will only create up to a 32GB partition, and takes over an hour to accomplish it. In fact, if you tell windows to format FAT32 on a partition that's say, 250GB, it will output the partition size (within about 5 seconds), then spend about 6 hours checking its integrity, and then bother to tell you it's too big.
11)I can move my installation to whatever hardware I feel like. Windows keeps track of your hardware and might make you reactivate the product if it changes.
12)I can use a usb->serial converter without a third-party driver. No such luck on my coworkers' XP laptops.
13)I can use the usb cable on my Sprint phone to connect to the Internet without a 3rd party driver.
14)As a matter of fact, there is only one device of any kind in my machine that required me to do anything special to add a driver. And that was as simple as using the aforementioned installation tool to install it.
15)If I wanted to, I could run my laptop as a wireless router/firewall. While I believe this is possible in Windows also, you would lose sophisticated abilities like QoS, fair queueing, L7 regex matching on TCP headers, traffic shaping, and all the other excruciatingly cool things IPtables has going for it.
You know, I could go on....but there's not much point. The important thing here is that it isn't Linux that lacks functionality. It has many, many times Windows' capabilities. And the best part is, I didn't pay a dime for any of this stuff. If I wanted to do all the things I've listed here in Windows, the costs would be astronomical. Perhaps more than the laptop cost in the first place.
It's flamebait because it's total and abject horseshit. The AC doesn't have a valid point, because the basic premise (i.e. that Linux lacks basic functionality) is demonstrably false. My laptop has accelerated 3D graphics, excellent sound, a GUI that has several features I always miss when forced to use windows, wireless (54g) networking, an office suite that does everything I need, DVD playback capability, CD-burning, and pretty much everything else I've ever wanted. The last time bullshit like this had legs was last mellenium.
First of all, good thing it doesn't break. Hopefully the brakes work ok though. Also, about the steering....that's really pretty much the user's responsibility.
The distrobution doesn't come with kernel sources
Isn't that a GPL violation?
Not as long as they make the sources available; i.e. if they are on an FTP site someplace, or can be apt-got, or (I think) if you can email and ask for them, this is kosher.
That said, it's bunk to not install the kernel source tree by default; if you need obscure modules or something you'll need to go hunting.
Cool...I was just talking yesterday about how cool it would be to find a scam that fleeces church groups. I guess my search is over.
Re:Ruin perfectly good hardware with crapy linux G
on
Linux On Your Tablet PC
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Putting Linux on your tablet is a bit like putting Linux on your powerbook....or putting Linux on your iPaq
Right. It's also a lot like putting it on your x86 laptop. Or your XBox, HDTV, DVR, PS2, or any of the other thousands of products that linux runs on. It's probably the most flexible general purpose OS ever. Which means folks inclined to tinker can put it wherever the hell they feel like. Get over it.
(For the record, I do own an iPaq, and it does run Linux. I'm quite pleased with it.)
Then you say, "It's none of your business who I choose to go out with." So, yes. Dating is a bad analogy here:)
Oh, I don't know....it seems that several here (including me) have told the PHP devs "It's none of your business what version of Apache I choose to run my PHP apps on." The analogy seems apt enough.
Slashdot Mirror
This isn't a very good comparison. In the one case you're talking about an OpenGL game that runs native on both platforms, and in the other you're talking about a D3D game that can only run in Linux through emulation.
That said, the reviews I've read about Doom3 on Linux say its performance is not as good as on Windows.
Does anybody have any experience with running HL2 on linux? How does it fare against the Win version on same hardware?
I haven't tried it yet. But I did read a review that claimed it was quite good. The reviewer had some trouble at first, but after a bit of tweaking said it worked perfectly, albeit at a very few frames/sec slower than it ran on Windows. My guess is that even that will ultimately be fixed; I basically quit gaming a couple years back, but I used to have a dual-booting box that ran counterstrike several fps faster in Linux than it did in Windows. Same hardware.
The opengl-only mac part of this is a great point. It's odd...nobody seems to question the logic of putting out games for the mac.....but more Linux desktops were sold last year than macs, and apparently that userbase is just "way too small" for anybody to find interesting.
Why can't someone port the Direct3D API to Linux? This would save a lot of hassle of porting the games to OpenGL.
It's not so much that no one can...just that it's way too much trouble for the benefits you'd get. Specifically, D3D relies heavily on a lot of the rest of the Win32 API. If you want D3D, you'll need either a Win32 API, or to rewrite all those calls. This makes sense in the context of wine, which is why cedega/winex have basically done all this. Not perfectly, mind you...but this is their goal.
Of course, you can add to this the fact that Linux already has perfectly good API's for this sort of thing in the form of OpenGL and SDL. And the fact that Microsoft has kept D3D a moving target.
And finally, there's the fact that porting D3D wouldn't necessarily solve all the problems; presumably, games that use D3D also make a bunch of other Win32 system calls. So, you're back to needing both D3D and Win32.
In other words, you might as well have said, "why doesn't somebody just port Windows to Linux so we can forget about all this bullshit?"
Yeah, it does sort of bite having to emerge it seperately. Same story with the madwifi driver.
Huh?
Despite the admonition to not quarrel with a fool (folks might not be able to tell who's who), I'll bite.
why would you want to run linux when xp tablet edition is pretty awesome and well-tested and integrated with other existing microsoft products?
First, I think your unsupported claims of XP's "awesome" and "well-tested" nature are quite amusing. I'll leave "awesome" alone because of its absolutely subjective nature, but I'll still note that I disagree, and feel instead that it "sucks." About "well-tested" though...how many remote root exploits were discovered for XP within the first quarter-year of its release?
here's the thing about open source - as soon as it becomes big, microsoft will adapt and still rule the world.
I must have missed the memo detailing that Microsoft currently rules the world. However, much more pertinent in my opinion is the question of their adaptation. Because clearly, open source has become big. One system runs the majority of the Internet. It's not Windows. As for the adaptation issue, I'm interested to hear what you think they might do. Because clearly, they haven't got any ideas yet...flailing about wildly and talking about how OSS is "cancer" doesn't count, and neither do advertisements about how 7-11 figured out that Windows on x86 was cheaper than Linux on mainframes. BTW, in case anyone was wondering, it is also more expensive to buy a Ferrari to go through the McDonald's drive-through than it is to take a cab to the nicest eatery in town.
how hard would it be for microsoft to emulate the best of open source's features and integrate it with every other microsoft product? not very hard, especially when you have billions of dollars and some of the world's best programmers that actually get paid for coding.
First, Microsoft does not have nearly as many programmers on its payroll as there are OSS programmers working on Linux-centric projects. Second, they don't spend nearly as much money paying their coders as the rest of the corporate world spends combined on Linux-centric development. So, instead of your "not very hard" analysis, I'd say "pretty much fucking impossible." And finally, if this isn't very hard, then why has the pace of OSS development clearly been outstripping what MS is capable of over the last decade or so? I mean, in 1995 the comparison between Linux and Windows was truly laughable. I started with Linux in 1998, and it wasn't even close to viable. Now, I find Linux much more usable and capable than Windows, to the point where I have one Windows installation left; a 10% chunk of my laptop harddrive, which booted less than 5 times in 2004. We were playing catchup for a while. Those days are past. We have not seen this alleged "adaptation." And we won't.
the movement will die as soon as people realize they're getting paid nothing and will always be paid nothing to create an inferior product.
Sorry, but this "movement" has been around pretty much exactly as long as computers have. In fact, Microsoft's model is much younger. Likewise, I don't think it's OSS whose model is passing into the crucible; it's Microsofts. We are about to find out whether proprietary software can really work. I think the answer is "no."
Also, you completely ignore the fact that many large companies are paying OSS developers.
but don't worry, microsoft's monopoly power is waning so we really have nothing to worry about.
Oh, never mind. I'm not sure why I replied. This poster was clearly simply under the influence of LSD.
Sorry, I have no idea how to make your computer run like it did yesterday.
Bwahahahah! That's classic. And yeah, that's one that escaped the list..."I can be reasonably sure that when I wake up tomorrow, my computer will not have totally fucked up for no readily-apparent or adequately explicable reason."
More often, I've found myself upset that the hardware manufacturers fail to support linux...
Wireless support is a good example of this.
No, wireless support is nearly the only remaining example of this. The wifi manufacturers are stuck in a tight spot, because FCC regulations (and perhaps their analogue in other countries) prohibit them from allowing users access to the parts of the software that control the frequencies and power output of the radio. So open sourcing the drivers is a legal impossibility. Most of them these days have already produced some Linux support anyway, like Atheros with its small binary hardware abstraction layer, which keeps the secrets hidden. And of course, for those of you who have the truly-unsupported broadcom 54g chips, or something similar, don't forget NDISWrapper...it may not be the most idealistic thing ever, but it sure gets you on the network.
Other than very narrow instances like this, hardware support for Linux is great. Let's try not to lose sight of the fact that Linux has many times the hardware support of Windows. Ever try running Windows on an Alpha? What about MIPS? Thought not.
it's all native driver support (except the nVidia module).
The NVidia driver is native.
Also, while I run Gentoo most of the time also, hardware detection does not "generally blow." It is in fact much more sophisticated than, say, the hardware detection in WindowsXP.
the middleware of autoconfig and setup routines never seems to work properly.
Dammit! This is the part that just makes me crazy! "never" seems to work? Are you fucking kidding? Don't you see?.....like 98% of the time, it just works right. Out of the box. I'm counting the people who didn't check to see if it was muted as working right. But seriously, the amount of time that sound doesn't work on hardware that isn't completely exotic is crazy low. In my experience, it's lower than Windows by a long shot...Windows has many, many fewer sound drivers built in, and if yours didn't make the cut you'll need to go find 3rd party drivers. And even if it did make the cut (or even if you did get the drivers) there's still a small percentage that is going to cause problems. Again, its just a case of everybody giving Windows every benefit of every doubt, and then complaining because Linux doesn't rise to some other more perfect standard.
Oh, and midi drivers are often crap on both platforms.
Even some of the better distros at hardware detection like SuSE, Mandrake and Yellowdog have community forums filled with regulars who love using the OS, yet still don't have everything working.
You haven't ever been to the Windows forums? And seen the thousands of people having problems getting things working on Windows?
Seriously, I'm tired of people bitching about how "sometimes things just don't work." I haven't found a system yet that didn't give somebody a pain in his ass. But these days, well over 90% of the time, I can have a Linux distribution up and fully functional many, many times faster than any of you out there can get an XP box to that same level. And I'm talking about experienced Windows installers here. Anybody who bitches about Linux being hard to install has either never had to install Windows, has completely forgotten what a pain it was, or is just outright lying.
P.S. If you are really using Linux, and are actually having trouble getting things to work, post a reply with the functionality in question and a way for me to get in touch with you. We'll get it fixed up in a jiffy.
Clinton was impeached for perjury, not for lying per se. Typical liberal spin.
Typically conservative ignorance. The federal perjury statute defines the felony as lying about a "material point" which is elsewhere defined as a point having an impact on the matter under scrutiny in the case. Considering that the question of whether Clinton got a BJ had absolutely nothing to do with any of the charges he was discussing with that grand jury that day, it was as immaterial as a question about what he had for breakfast that morning. It was never even close to questionable whether that was a chargeable offense.
Clinton was impeached for an act that was unquestionably not a crime, and any trial lawyer will tell you the same.
*I can't see why you'd want to run Linux on a Tablet PC *
because you can configure it to be much lighter?
Bullshit. I just installed debian on my TC1000, and it weighed exactly the same as it did when I had XP on it.
Perhaps it's better to just bite the bullet and accept that Microsoft have come up with something pretty good.
With an attitude like that, we'd never have Linux in the first place. You're proposing a chicken-egg problem: "don't bother with Linux, because there's no support...since there's nobody bothering with Linux, why support it?" It's probably not entirely ready on tablets yet....but it wasn't entirely ready for servers in 1992 either. Those of us who aren't ready to accept the mediocre results handed to us by the single source of proprietary mainstream system software feel it's more reasonable to "bite the bullet" in a different way, helping try to improve software which may begin as inferior, but has much more potential for growth into something really cool.
And for the record, this situation is a lot simpler than the one we were looking at in '92. Given the results of that, I'd watch out for these tablets. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon, and for the rest of your life.
You must not have ever used Windows 1.0. Windows were not even allowed to overlap.
Damn, I quit too soon. I forgot to mention all the cool things my laptop can do that it wouldn't be able to if it ran windows:
1)I can update all my software with one command. Windows Update will only handle OS components.
2)I can install nearly any piece of software from one unified interface. In Windows, I need to go hunting for the software and install it whatever way the developer chose.
3)I can personally control my processor speed and the criteria for speedstepping. Windows will not allow this.
4)I can choose any window and ask it to always stay on top. In Windows there are some windows that always stay on top, but you can't choose which ones they are.
5)I can choose any of the last 25 blocks of text I've selected to fill my clipboard buffer. The whole cut/paste situation is much more sophisticated in KDE.
6)I can run web/ftp/mail servers. If you want to do this with Windows, you'll need to either buy the expensive MS offerings, or go get Apache and thank the same geeks you are dissing.
7)I can remotely access both Windows Terminal Services and VNC, or run a VNC server. This will require 3rd party software in windows.
8)I can play DVDs. Again, 3rd party software does this for windows.
9)I can burn CDs. Same story.
10)I can take a blank hard drive, write DOS partitions to it, and format it for FAT32, in any size, in under 1 minute. WindowsXP will only create up to a 32GB partition, and takes over an hour to accomplish it. In fact, if you tell windows to format FAT32 on a partition that's say, 250GB, it will output the partition size (within about 5 seconds), then spend about 6 hours checking its integrity, and then bother to tell you it's too big.
11)I can move my installation to whatever hardware I feel like. Windows keeps track of your hardware and might make you reactivate the product if it changes.
12)I can use a usb->serial converter without a third-party driver. No such luck on my coworkers' XP laptops.
13)I can use the usb cable on my Sprint phone to connect to the Internet without a 3rd party driver.
14)As a matter of fact, there is only one device of any kind in my machine that required me to do anything special to add a driver. And that was as simple as using the aforementioned installation tool to install it.
15)If I wanted to, I could run my laptop as a wireless router/firewall. While I believe this is possible in Windows also, you would lose sophisticated abilities like QoS, fair queueing, L7 regex matching on TCP headers, traffic shaping, and all the other excruciatingly cool things IPtables has going for it.
You know, I could go on....but there's not much point. The important thing here is that it isn't Linux that lacks functionality. It has many, many times Windows' capabilities. And the best part is, I didn't pay a dime for any of this stuff. If I wanted to do all the things I've listed here in Windows, the costs would be astronomical. Perhaps more than the laptop cost in the first place.
It's flamebait because it's total and abject horseshit. The AC doesn't have a valid point, because the basic premise (i.e. that Linux lacks basic functionality) is demonstrably false. My laptop has accelerated 3D graphics, excellent sound, a GUI that has several features I always miss when forced to use windows, wireless (54g) networking, an office suite that does everything I need, DVD playback capability, CD-burning, and pretty much everything else I've ever wanted. The last time bullshit like this had legs was last mellenium.
So shut the fuck up already.
It can't steer, break...
First of all, good thing it doesn't break. Hopefully the brakes work ok though. Also, about the steering....that's really pretty much the user's responsibility.
It's almost as if no matter what Microsoft comes out with Linux is managed to be placed onto it. Great huh?
Almost? Fuck! What did we miss?Unfortunately that won't happen in the very near future though, unless some rapid development takes place.
Fortunately, "rapid development" is pretty much par for the Linux course.
The distrobution doesn't come with kernel sources
Isn't that a GPL violation?
Not as long as they make the sources available; i.e. if they are on an FTP site someplace, or can be apt-got, or (I think) if you can email and ask for them, this is kosher.
That said, it's bunk to not install the kernel source tree by default; if you need obscure modules or something you'll need to go hunting.
Cool...I was just talking yesterday about how cool it would be to find a scam that fleeces church groups. I guess my search is over.
Putting Linux on your tablet is a bit like putting Linux on your powerbook....or putting Linux on your iPaq
Right. It's also a lot like putting it on your x86 laptop. Or your XBox, HDTV, DVR, PS2, or any of the other thousands of products that linux runs on. It's probably the most flexible general purpose OS ever. Which means folks inclined to tinker can put it wherever the hell they feel like. Get over it.
(For the record, I do own an iPaq, and it does run Linux. I'm quite pleased with it.)
The Linux Philosophy:
if it moves, try loading linux on it.
Close. Just leave off the "if it moves" part...
Then you say, "It's none of your business who I choose to go out with." So, yes. Dating is a bad analogy here :)
Oh, I don't know....it seems that several here (including me) have told the PHP devs "It's none of your business what version of Apache I choose to run my PHP apps on." The analogy seems apt enough.