Firstly, 'none' is not a contraction for 'not one'. It is a DESCENDANT of a contraction for the Old English phrase meaning 'not one'.
Secondly, the usage of the word depends on what you're talking about. 'None' is defined as both 'not any' (which is the first defintion, mind you) and 'not one' on m-w.com (dictionary.com is down -_-). In the case of 'not any' (i.e., 'not any amount' of something), you would usually use the word as a plural. In the case of 'not one' (i.e., 'not a single one' of something), you would use it as a singular.
Of course, 'democracy' doesn't necessarily have to mean direct democracy, and i certainly realise that. But i was operating under that definition because of the context of the parent's post. They were talking about Debian being a democracy (which i assume means direct voting -- i don't know exactly how Debian works, but if it has elected representatives, that's pretty hard-core), and the general tone of the parent's post seemed to me to be referring (or at least comparing) to direct democracy. So you'll have to excuse me if i don't spell out 'direct democracy' every single time i refer to it in a context that seems fairly obvious to me.
And i won't be old enough to vote until after the US presidential elections this year.;_;
First of all, whether or not you can do what you want with the fruit of your earnings has absolutely NOTHING to do with democracy. If the majority of citizens vote in favour of having the government take 50% of your wages and give it to the President, that is democracy, whether you personally are in that majority or not. Democracy is majority rule, not absolute personal freedom. What you're talking about is anarchy, or maybe some form of libertarianism.
And secondly, anyone who tells you that you live in a democracy is confused. The United States is not a democracy. It never has been, and it never will be, and nobody who knows the definition of 'democracy' has ever claimed that it was.
I could be wrong here (i'm not an expert on how IE does things), so don't flame me, but isn't ActiveX the method that allows Internet Explorer to have programs installing 'themselfs' without asking you? Again, i might be wrong, but i've always believed that that was the case. If so, yes, it is user ignorance. Three or four clicks will disable that. If you're willing to actually read the security options in IE, you'll find a lot of things that will make it a lot more secure.
Of course, that doesn't fix the lack of features, the non-compliance with standards, the pop-ups, &c. But those aren't necessarily security flaws.
I don't actually have any clue what Apple said or didn't say. I don't really pay a lot of attention to iTMS. Just giving my interpretation of his arguement.:)
Apple cannot negotiate with artists, period. The labels won't let them. That might be unfortunate (I agree that it is) but it's not Apple's responsibility to unfuck the usurious contracts.
I'm pretty sure he's referring to Apple's 'deceitfulness', rather than their supposed hand in the mess. If Apple can't do anything about it, that's great. Nobody expects them to. But the problem is that Apple say it's 'more fair' to the artists, which is false. In other words, they're lying. I think that's the point he (or the person he was quoting) was trying to make.
It's important to note the loss in quality that comes with the download->burn->rip process, though. (In case there are any people on Slashdot that suk@music am i rite.)
Wow. Nobody ever talks to me on Slashdot unless i criticise Linux. Then i have to make 800 replies to defend myself.:/
I'm really curious about your hardware because I am running a computer using Mandrake Linux and all of the hardware was detected and setup correctly.
I was running Mandrake when i was messing with my wireless card, also. I think it was an ORiNOCO (or however you capitalise that) card, and i think i got the driver source from Lucent's site. I don't remember, it was a while ago, and i've changed houses and networking situations since then, so i dunno, i could be a little off. Anyway, i know there are bound to be hardware differences all over. It's not really something i can fault Linux for too much. But, like i said, it was just an example, and a dumb one off the top of my head, at that.
As far as the fragmented thing, I'm beginning to wonder if this is the newest Microsoft FUD. Linux is NOT as fragmented as you make out. Most programmer's write using either the KDE or the Gnome libraries. I use KDE and all of my applications have a consistent look and feel. Programmer's can make their programs look and feel different if they want to but this is the case in Windows as well.
They can with Windows, but most of the time they don't. And no, this isn't 'Microsoft FUD'. I don't listen to any of the garbage Microsoft spew about Linux -- anything i think about Linux is the result of my own experience.:)
That said, i'm not really sure what i can do to argue against the 'consisent look and feel' thing, considering i guess i didn't really give Linux too much of a chance in that situation. (You know, since i didn't have Internet access, i was kind of stuck with what came on the system, heh.) When i used it, though, KDE applications looked different from GNOME applications. KDE applications, i think, would give me the KDE themes in Window Maker? I recall something like that, i think. Definitely not cool.
And although KDE and Gnome don't look like XP, that's not necessarily a bad thing and definitely not hideous.
I never said i wanted them to look like XP. I think XP's default theme is pretty ugly, actually. It's what you can get from third parties that's nice. For Linux, i always use Window Maker. It's my favourite, and i think the basic interface design is the best -- but the 'themes' (or whatever they're called) are really really ugly, and it's pretty difficult to get them to not be ugly. And, of course, once you do get them to not be ugly, that goes back to what i said before. Some KDE application will come along and ruin your hard work.:/
With patches that don't exist? Yeah, I'll just whip out the old binary editor and patch it myself. Then it might be "sort of" secure. "Sort of" is good enough for me!
I don't have a problem with it. That's not to say that problems don't exist or that nobody has a problem with it, but i've never used a firewall or anti-virus software, and my computing experience is perfectly exploit-free. If i ever did have problems with something, i would do something about it. Fuck patches, i can't rely on Microsoft for that. I'll turn on my firewall, or i'll disallow access to the offending program, or whatever. No binary editors needed.
"I'm smug enough to think that it will never happen to me!"
Can you read? I said 'i've never had'. It's the present-perfect tense, i believe -- something that happened in the past. Never once did i indicate anything happening (or not happening, in this case) in the future. See my last response for what i'd do in that event, though.
Every other month?!?! Christ man, are you insane? Two months without a critical patch means instant rooting for you boy!
Seriously? My Windows Update history says i did installs on the following dates:
Hmmm lets see. Windows 98 (it was a preinstall) didn't have any user policies, and I am not paying $hundreds of dollars for a newer version of windows that does, when I can get that feature for free with linux.
K, that's different, i suppose. I can't criticise you for that.
BTW, I didn't have to set up the user policies in linux. I installed it, it asked for a root password, then it asked for the name of the user and a password for that. All that is part of the normal instsall process. You do not need to be an experienced linux user to be able to do that.
It's great that an experienced Linux user can set up a system that his daughter can use without destroying. An experienced Windows (NT) user can do the same, though. Maybe you should have set up user policies on your Windows machine just like you did on your Linux one...?
OK, firstly, i wasn't talking about programs that they come with. I was talking about important things, like, you know, drivers. Or some kind of atmosphere of being on the same system when moving between tasks. (You know, a system where not everybody codes to completely different and arbitrary standards using a thousand different interface-design principles and APIs and window managers and so forth.)
While we're on that subject, though, all of the word processors you listed (including the ones for Windows) suck, except for OOo. I'm sure they're coded fantastically (LyX has that whole no-bugs thing going for it, which is great), but they're ugly and unintuitive. So... hooray, OOo is on Windows, no need to complain there.
(I bet you don't run everything as Administrator on Windows XP)
Yes, i do run everything as an administrator. Not the Administrator account, but they have exactly the same privileges. Fortunately for Windows, it's sort of, you know, intuitive, so i don't have any troubles.
Like What?
Like something that's not hideous. Have you looked at those links? They don't look like Windows XP or OS X. They're ugly. 99% of the Linux GUI is hideous. The best they've done is the latest GNOME stuff (which is pretty neat), but even that doesn't come close to what you can do with a few clicks on Windows or OS X. And how can it? Everybody codes to a different API and a different set of standards, even if you got the perfect theme some program would come along that would destroy it all. Windows does a far better job emulating OS X with its msstyles than KDE does there, by the way.
Didn't they have installation instructions? Did the package include a README file? Did you actually read it?
It did, and i did. It being my first time using a compiler and only my second or third attempt at Linux, though, it took me a while to figure it out.
So, without any form of security (apart from your common sense) and with a known exploitable bug on your system, you still go on the net.
My common sense tells me to get the update to make it non-exploitable. Or maybe turn on the firewall on my router (or, hay hay, the one that comes with Windows).
It's really not a case of being intelligent. Linux is getting to be country simple to install and it's already no harder to use than Windows.
It's just as easy to install as Windows is, if not easier, yes. But that's not what i'm talking about. I know there are valid reasons for why Linux is the way it is, and i've had them explained to me a billion times: Why it doesn't come with as many of these as Windows, why it doesn't have this, why it makes you do this, why it looks like this. But whatever the reasons, i find them counter-productive. I can't get my mouse acceleration to work in KDE properly. With Windows, it works automatically. I never even have to go into the Control Panel. With KDE, i spent almost an hour playing with the sliders and i still couldn't get it to work right. When i'd had enough of that, i went to getting my sound to work. I couldn't play music without getting random crackling in it. I didn't even know where to begin with that. What do i do there? Install a new sound-card driver? Install a new sound server? I got nothing done there, so i went to getting my wireless card to work. They had drivers on-line somewhere, but i had to compile them. After spending 40 minutes trying to figure out how to compile properly (i'm not a programmer, sorry), i got it to compile, but it still wouldn't work, and there wasn't any easy way for me to find out. Maybe a seasoned user could've pulled up some log files somewhere and found exactly the problem, but how am i to know where those log files are or what they mean?
And those are relatively stupid examples. There are much better ones out there, i'm sure.
Are you sure? When your box gets owned chances are you'll be the last to know.:-)
If my computer has been 'owned', i haven't noticed it, so i probably wouldn't care so much anyway.:p
The open source community responded lighting fast and reprogrammed the part of Mozilla that allowed a user to exploit a weakness in the XP operating system. They shouldn't have had to do this. Microsoft should have closed this hole more than a year ago.
That's true. There's no way i can defend Microsoft there. I'm in agreement on it, in fact: Microsoft are far too slow getting out critical updates. Fortunately, though, i hate Mozilla, so i wasn't affected.:)
Running an update every other month may give you a sense of security but it is a false sense of security!
I don't have a sense of security. I don't need one. I have something better -- it's called common sense. There are some things that you can't help, like the RPC exploit. But for the most part, if you use your brain, you'll be quite secure. I don't use anti-virus programs because i don't get viruses. I don't need adware/spyware cleaners because i don't get adware. (Actually, i need them because my family does, heh.) Stuff like that. I don't know if you guys use Windows, but you don't act like it. I honestly have ZERO problems with it.:/
Can you really blame them? They're in a race against people who tried Windows 95 or Windows Me and thought it was unstable. And now they spend every second of their lives complaining about how Windows crashes every 20 seconds and you have to reboot to install anything and if Winamp crashes you might as well just do a cold restart because there's no way Windows is coming back from that....
Maybe this is part of the problem with you guys. You really think KDE is 'eye candy'?:/
This probably doesn't matter to a whole lot of people, but i'm a huge interface person. It's not as superficial as some people seem to believe -- i need my computer to look good to be able to get something done. Maybe it's an obsessive-compulsive thing. If it's ugly, i tend to focus on the ugliness, and i'm not as productive (or, at least, not as comfortable).
The Linux GUI* is, firstly, ugly. There are two or three semi-decent skins/themes for it, but that leads us to the second problem: Even if there was a decent skin or theme for it, everything is so completely fragmented in its design that it wouldn't matter, because it wouldn't look the same anyway. e.g., if i run kterm in Window Maker, it looks completely different from most of the other applications i have running in Window Maker.
I know i'm probably missing some distinction there (because Linux has like seven-hundred levels of GUI, from X to window managers), so there's probably a valid reason for that, and maybe there's even a way to fix it. But i shouldn't have to fix it. Everything on my computer should look the same, by default.
* I use the term 'GUI' loosely. I know there are different window managers and desk-top environments and all that jazz.
It seems to me that if you're intelligent enough to use Linux every day, you're probably intelligent enough to keep your Windows machine sort of secure. I know i've never had a security problem on any of my Windows computers, and i only switched off of IE maybe 6 months ago.
Anyway, Linux is definitely more secure than Windows any day, but what are you willing to give up in order to have that extra security that you probably will never need? The list is too long to even begin. Going to Windows Update and clicking 'install updates' once every other month is a small price to pay for having a usable computer.
I'll probably get modded down as a troll, but i'm sorry, it's just the way it is for most people. Linux, BSD, &c., are fantastic for servers, and they're fantastic if you're really really really hard-core about open-source software. But for the desk top, no way. If there are this many people who are computer-savvy and hate Linux, just imagine how many non-computer-savvy people there are who won't like it.
I don't know if you're on Windows, but i am, and i find that Gaim (for Windows) is a pretty poor client. I mean, it's OK, but compared to other things, it needs a lot of work. It seems to me like the Windows version of Gaim was nothing more than an after-thought. I can't get work done (I'm paid to sit around instant-messaging my friends all day -- true story.) using an after-thought.;_;
So... i use Miranda. Needs a lot of work also, but it's much better off than Gaim, i find, and it's just as open.
Hey, thanks for the link to the Windows site! I would be confused about the operating system i'm running if you hadn't provided that distinction for me~
(Plus i'm pretty sure anyone who's intelligent enough to use Linux is probably intelligent enough to make the three or four clicks necessary to disable auto-run on Windows.)
PLUS: 'Update: Ian sez, "Hi, I'm not sure who posted re: Beastie Boys copy protection, but I just spoke with Mike D and their management and they wanted me to pass along that a) This is all territories except the US and UK -- US and UK discs do not have this protection on them; b) All EMI CDs are treated this way, theirs isn't receiving special treatment; c) They would have preferred not to have the copy protection, but weren't allowed to differ from EMI policy."'
Y HELO THAR KNEE-JERK
Also, you totally ruin any arguement you may have, no matter how good it is, when you use a dollar sign in Microsoft's name. Keep it hard-core, guys. -_-
Slashdot Mirror
Firstly, 'none' is not a contraction for 'not one'. It is a DESCENDANT of a contraction for the Old English phrase meaning 'not one'.
Secondly, the usage of the word depends on what you're talking about. 'None' is defined as both 'not any' (which is the first defintion, mind you) and 'not one' on m-w.com (dictionary.com is down -_-). In the case of 'not any' (i.e., 'not any amount' of something), you would usually use the word as a plural. In the case of 'not one' (i.e., 'not a single one' of something), you would use it as a singular.
gb2/skool, am i rite or wut
Of course, 'democracy' doesn't necessarily have to mean direct democracy, and i certainly realise that. But i was operating under that definition because of the context of the parent's post. They were talking about Debian being a democracy (which i assume means direct voting -- i don't know exactly how Debian works, but if it has elected representatives, that's pretty hard-core), and the general tone of the parent's post seemed to me to be referring (or at least comparing) to direct democracy. So you'll have to excuse me if i don't spell out 'direct democracy' every single time i refer to it in a context that seems fairly obvious to me.
And i won't be old enough to vote until after the US presidential elections this year.
First of all, whether or not you can do what you want with the fruit of your earnings has absolutely NOTHING to do with democracy. If the majority of citizens vote in favour of having the government take 50% of your wages and give it to the President, that is democracy, whether you personally are in that majority or not. Democracy is majority rule, not absolute personal freedom. What you're talking about is anarchy, or maybe some form of libertarianism.
And secondly, anyone who tells you that you live in a democracy is confused. The United States is not a democracy. It never has been, and it never will be, and nobody who knows the definition of 'democracy' has ever claimed that it was.
I could be wrong here (i'm not an expert on how IE does things), so don't flame me, but isn't ActiveX the method that allows Internet Explorer to have programs installing 'themselfs' without asking you? Again, i might be wrong, but i've always believed that that was the case. If so, yes, it is user ignorance. Three or four clicks will disable that. If you're willing to actually read the security options in IE, you'll find a lot of things that will make it a lot more secure.
Of course, that doesn't fix the lack of features, the non-compliance with standards, the pop-ups, &c. But those aren't necessarily security flaws.
It's because Mozilla is a platform rather than a browser. :/
I don't actually have any clue what Apple said or didn't say. I don't really pay a lot of attention to iTMS. Just giving my interpretation of his arguement. :)
Apple cannot negotiate with artists, period. The labels won't let them. That might be unfortunate (I agree that it is) but it's not Apple's responsibility to unfuck the usurious contracts.
I'm pretty sure he's referring to Apple's 'deceitfulness', rather than their supposed hand in the mess. If Apple can't do anything about it, that's great. Nobody expects them to. But the problem is that Apple say it's 'more fair' to the artists, which is false. In other words, they're lying. I think that's the point he (or the person he was quoting) was trying to make.
It's important to note the loss in quality that comes with the download->burn->rip process, though. (In case there are any people on Slashdot that suk@music am i rite.)
Wow. Nobody ever talks to me on Slashdot unless i criticise Linux. Then i have to make 800 replies to defend myself. :/
I'm really curious about your hardware because I am running a computer using Mandrake Linux and all of the hardware was detected and setup correctly.
I was running Mandrake when i was messing with my wireless card, also. I think it was an ORiNOCO (or however you capitalise that) card, and i think i got the driver source from Lucent's site. I don't remember, it was a while ago, and i've changed houses and networking situations since then, so i dunno, i could be a little off. Anyway, i know there are bound to be hardware differences all over. It's not really something i can fault Linux for too much. But, like i said, it was just an example, and a dumb one off the top of my head, at that.
As far as the fragmented thing, I'm beginning to wonder if this is the newest Microsoft FUD. Linux is NOT as fragmented as you make out. Most programmer's write using either the KDE or the Gnome libraries. I use KDE and all of my applications have a consistent look and feel. Programmer's can make their programs look and feel different if they want to but this is the case in Windows as well.
They can with Windows, but most of the time they don't. And no, this isn't 'Microsoft FUD'. I don't listen to any of the garbage Microsoft spew about Linux -- anything i think about Linux is the result of my own experience. :)
That said, i'm not really sure what i can do to argue against the 'consisent look and feel' thing, considering i guess i didn't really give Linux too much of a chance in that situation. (You know, since i didn't have Internet access, i was kind of stuck with what came on the system, heh.) When i used it, though, KDE applications looked different from GNOME applications. KDE applications, i think, would give me the KDE themes in Window Maker? I recall something like that, i think. Definitely not cool.
And although KDE and Gnome don't look like XP, that's not necessarily a bad thing and definitely not hideous.
I never said i wanted them to look like XP. I think XP's default theme is pretty ugly, actually. It's what you can get from third parties that's nice. For Linux, i always use Window Maker. It's my favourite, and i think the basic interface design is the best -- but the 'themes' (or whatever they're called) are really really ugly, and it's pretty difficult to get them to not be ugly. And, of course, once you do get them to not be ugly, that goes back to what i said before. Some KDE application will come along and ruin your hard work. :/
With patches that don't exist? Yeah, I'll just whip out the old binary editor and patch it myself. Then it might be "sort of" secure. "Sort of" is good enough for me!
I don't have a problem with it. That's not to say that problems don't exist or that nobody has a problem with it, but i've never used a firewall or anti-virus software, and my computing experience is perfectly exploit-free. If i ever did have problems with something, i would do something about it. Fuck patches, i can't rely on Microsoft for that. I'll turn on my firewall, or i'll disallow access to the offending program, or whatever. No binary editors needed.
"I'm smug enough to think that it will never happen to me!"
Can you read? I said 'i've never had'. It's the present-perfect tense, i believe -- something that happened in the past. Never once did i indicate anything happening (or not happening, in this case) in the future. See my last response for what i'd do in that event, though.
Every other month?!?! Christ man, are you insane? Two months without a critical patch means instant rooting for you boy!
Seriously? My Windows Update history says i did installs on the following dates:
Saturday, 03 July, 2004
Saturday, 05 June, 2004
Saturday, 01 May, 2004
Tuesday, 24 February, 2004
Sorry, i was a little off. Not exactly every month. But close enough, i suppose. And i've yet to experience 'instant rooting'. :/
PS: Can you guys stop calling me 'man' and 'boy'? That's really annoying.
Hmmm lets see. Windows 98 (it was a preinstall) didn't have any user policies, and I am not paying $hundreds of dollars for a newer version of windows that does, when I can get that feature for free with linux.
K, that's different, i suppose. I can't criticise you for that.
BTW, I didn't have to set up the user policies in linux. I installed it, it asked for a root password, then it asked for the name of the user and a password for that. All that is part of the normal instsall process. You do not need to be an experienced linux user to be able to do that.
I see. Windows XP does the same thing. :p
It's great that an experienced Linux user can set up a system that his daughter can use without destroying. An experienced Windows (NT) user can do the same, though. Maybe you should have set up user policies on your Windows machine just like you did on your Linux one...?
OK, firstly, i wasn't talking about programs that they come with. I was talking about important things, like, you know, drivers. Or some kind of atmosphere of being on the same system when moving between tasks. (You know, a system where not everybody codes to completely different and arbitrary standards using a thousand different interface-design principles and APIs and window managers and so forth.)
While we're on that subject, though, all of the word processors you listed (including the ones for Windows) suck, except for OOo. I'm sure they're coded fantastically (LyX has that whole no-bugs thing going for it, which is great), but they're ugly and unintuitive. So... hooray, OOo is on Windows, no need to complain there.
(I bet you don't run everything as Administrator on Windows XP)
Yes, i do run everything as an administrator. Not the Administrator account, but they have exactly the same privileges. Fortunately for Windows, it's sort of, you know, intuitive, so i don't have any troubles.
Like What?
Like something that's not hideous. Have you looked at those links? They don't look like Windows XP or OS X. They're ugly. 99% of the Linux GUI is hideous. The best they've done is the latest GNOME stuff (which is pretty neat), but even that doesn't come close to what you can do with a few clicks on Windows or OS X. And how can it? Everybody codes to a different API and a different set of standards, even if you got the perfect theme some program would come along that would destroy it all. Windows does a far better job emulating OS X with its msstyles than KDE does there, by the way.
Didn't they have installation instructions? Did the package include a README file? Did you actually read it?
It did, and i did. It being my first time using a compiler and only my second or third attempt at Linux, though, it took me a while to figure it out.
So, without any form of security (apart from your common sense) and with a known exploitable bug on your system, you still go on the net.
My common sense tells me to get the update to make it non-exploitable. Or maybe turn on the firewall on my router (or, hay hay, the one that comes with Windows).
Here come the 'troll' mods.
It's really not a case of being intelligent. Linux is getting to be country simple to install and it's already no harder to use than Windows.
It's just as easy to install as Windows is, if not easier, yes. But that's not what i'm talking about. I know there are valid reasons for why Linux is the way it is, and i've had them explained to me a billion times: Why it doesn't come with as many of these as Windows, why it doesn't have this, why it makes you do this, why it looks like this. But whatever the reasons, i find them counter-productive. I can't get my mouse acceleration to work in KDE properly. With Windows, it works automatically. I never even have to go into the Control Panel. With KDE, i spent almost an hour playing with the sliders and i still couldn't get it to work right. When i'd had enough of that, i went to getting my sound to work. I couldn't play music without getting random crackling in it. I didn't even know where to begin with that. What do i do there? Install a new sound-card driver? Install a new sound server? I got nothing done there, so i went to getting my wireless card to work. They had drivers on-line somewhere, but i had to compile them. After spending 40 minutes trying to figure out how to compile properly (i'm not a programmer, sorry), i got it to compile, but it still wouldn't work, and there wasn't any easy way for me to find out. Maybe a seasoned user could've pulled up some log files somewhere and found exactly the problem, but how am i to know where those log files are or what they mean?
And those are relatively stupid examples. There are much better ones out there, i'm sure.
Are you sure? When your box gets owned chances are you'll be the last to know.
If my computer has been 'owned', i haven't noticed it, so i probably wouldn't care so much anyway. :p
The open source community responded lighting fast and reprogrammed the part of Mozilla that allowed a user to exploit a weakness in the XP operating system. They shouldn't have had to do this. Microsoft should have closed this hole more than a year ago.
That's true. There's no way i can defend Microsoft there. I'm in agreement on it, in fact: Microsoft are far too slow getting out critical updates. Fortunately, though, i hate Mozilla, so i wasn't affected. :)
Running an update every other month may give you a sense of security but it is a false sense of security!
I don't have a sense of security. I don't need one. I have something better -- it's called common sense. There are some things that you can't help, like the RPC exploit. But for the most part, if you use your brain, you'll be quite secure. I don't use anti-virus programs because i don't get viruses. I don't need adware/spyware cleaners because i don't get adware. (Actually, i need them because my family does, heh.) Stuff like that. I don't know if you guys use Windows, but you don't act like it. I honestly have ZERO problems with it. :/
Can you really blame them? They're in a race against people who tried Windows 95 or Windows Me and thought it was unstable. And now they spend every second of their lives complaining about how Windows crashes every 20 seconds and you have to reboot to install anything and if Winamp crashes you might as well just do a cold restart because there's no way Windows is coming back from that....
Things have changed on both sides.
KDE: Eye candy that gnome might lack.
Maybe this is part of the problem with you guys. You really think KDE is 'eye candy'? :/
This probably doesn't matter to a whole lot of people, but i'm a huge interface person. It's not as superficial as some people seem to believe -- i need my computer to look good to be able to get something done. Maybe it's an obsessive-compulsive thing. If it's ugly, i tend to focus on the ugliness, and i'm not as productive (or, at least, not as comfortable).
The Linux GUI* is, firstly, ugly. There are two or three semi-decent skins/themes for it, but that leads us to the second problem: Even if there was a decent skin or theme for it, everything is so completely fragmented in its design that it wouldn't matter, because it wouldn't look the same anyway. e.g., if i run kterm in Window Maker, it looks completely different from most of the other applications i have running in Window Maker.
I know i'm probably missing some distinction there (because Linux has like seven-hundred levels of GUI, from X to window managers), so there's probably a valid reason for that, and maybe there's even a way to fix it. But i shouldn't have to fix it. Everything on my computer should look the same, by default.
* I use the term 'GUI' loosely. I know there are different window managers and desk-top environments and all that jazz.
It seems to me that if you're intelligent enough to use Linux every day, you're probably intelligent enough to keep your Windows machine sort of secure. I know i've never had a security problem on any of my Windows computers, and i only switched off of IE maybe 6 months ago.
Anyway, Linux is definitely more secure than Windows any day, but what are you willing to give up in order to have that extra security that you probably will never need? The list is too long to even begin. Going to Windows Update and clicking 'install updates' once every other month is a small price to pay for having a usable computer.
I'll probably get modded down as a troll, but i'm sorry, it's just the way it is for most people. Linux, BSD, &c., are fantastic for servers, and they're fantastic if you're really really really hard-core about open-source software. But for the desk top, no way. If there are this many people who are computer-savvy and hate Linux, just imagine how many non-computer-savvy people there are who won't like it.
NTFS's 'link' features are entirely useless, last i checked. They fall quite short of UNIX's. :(
Well, i'll tell you what i think: One shouldn't quote the American Heritage Dictionary and then bring up Webster. :(
Actually, i just re-read what he said. Never mind, i suppose. -_-
The 'quick fix' seems to be working for me, also. At least, i'm not getting 'hay ur password is rong dood!!!11' errors anymore.
I'm using 0.3.4 alpha (and the Y!IM plug-in that came with it).
I don't know if you're on Windows, but i am, and i find that Gaim (for Windows) is a pretty poor client. I mean, it's OK, but compared to other things, it needs a lot of work. It seems to me like the Windows version of Gaim was nothing more than an after-thought. I can't get work done (I'm paid to sit around instant-messaging my friends all day -- true story.) using an after-thought. ;_;
So... i use Miranda. Needs a lot of work also, but it's much better off than Gaim, i find, and it's just as open.
Yeah, same. Unless this JUST started happening, the claim is tenuous at best. I received an invite just 2 or 3 days ago, and it worked fine. :/
Hey, thanks for the link to the Windows site! I would be confused about the operating system i'm running if you hadn't provided that distinction for me~
(Plus i'm pretty sure anyone who's intelligent enough to use Linux is probably intelligent enough to make the three or four clicks necessary to disable auto-run on Windows.)
PLUS: 'Update: Ian sez, "Hi, I'm not sure who posted re: Beastie Boys copy protection, but I just spoke with Mike D and their management and they wanted me to pass along that a) This is all territories except the US and UK -- US and UK discs do not have this protection on them; b) All EMI CDs are treated this way, theirs isn't receiving special treatment; c) They would have preferred not to have the copy protection, but weren't allowed to differ from EMI policy."'
Y HELO THAR KNEE-JERK
Also, you totally ruin any arguement you may have, no matter how good it is, when you use a dollar sign in Microsoft's name. Keep it hard-core, guys. -_-
2. Used to express wonder, surprise, or incredulity: I actually won the lottery!