I am not so sure.
I applied heavy pressure to convert my Mum to Ubuntu due to the state of her Windows install meaning that basically nothing worked consistently anymore anyway. The heavy part was required as she had no understanding of any of it, so change == bad.
Now, no calls, no issues - have checked. All just works.
For basic non-power users (i.e. just browsing, email, simple word processing) it takes some beating in terms of no issues, runs on windows hardware happily (roll on simple Mac installs?).
The only issue I can see is that if you hand a linux system over and they have a problem with it, they are going to be forced repeat business unless they know a power user of their own...
I keep seeing more and more of these kinds of "big brother is coming, and he's got this new technology helping him too" kind of articles.
Is it not time to stop slagging off new technology for the bad things that could be done with it and rather, try to put forwards some realistic approaches to how a modern civ. is going to deal with new technology in the future
- i.e. make some laws/guidelines that are slightly more future-proof than the ones we currently have.
I would much rather see someone talking about solutions that deal with the possible creation of some extremely serious technology.
Re:It's NOT disk space, it's memory footprint, sil
on
Ark Linux
·
· Score: 1
Surely this can be fixed by 1. including copies of all the shared libs that you need in the installation 2. the OS merging binary identical libs when loading them into memory - thus, shared libs without memory wastage and never another complaint about cant find lib X.
A smalltalk guy I know *loved* the fact that when you compiled a program it included everything in there so you never had a library conflict (if this is wrong, it's cos I've never actually used smalltalk).
I would say that the scientific body of the government should be doing research into rapid learning techniques - for the other members of the Whitehouse;-)
[clip], set restrictions on how many TV and radio stations can be owned by one company, and determine whether a company can own both newspapers and TV stations that serve the same community.
I guess if they let any TV network own as many channels as they want, then they too can use M$s "embrace and destroy" method of market domination by just buying all the small competition.
Not convinced about the idea that this won't stop new entrants into the market place and any that do appear will get rapidly snapped up by one of the big 3 to be.
That prospect has Amazon, Microsoft Corp. and a coalition of other technology companies worried that those gatekeepers could prevent users from looking at certain content
How many consumers would seriously put up with internet content being blocked if it's not the suppliers companies content?
Maybe certain ISPs would be born that are basically a new version of TV channels - only their content but provided for a lower price...
Two reasons that software is not of the level of quality that people seem for some reason to expect (that of bridges obviously).
1. Supposed Coders/Poets are also expected to be testers.
I don't see why this is expected. You don't get the guy from Porsche/Ferrari who draws the design of how the car is supposed to look to actually build it down to the last nut and test every element of it. In my experience, coders and testers have a vastly different view of the world and the one cannot do the others job anywhere near as well. No coder should be without a tester - then at least the software I produced would be a lot better (proved to me on 2 projects done with a dedicated tester).
2. Where is the comeback when someone writes some useless code? No comeback to either the company or the individuals.
Try building a bridge and putting a disclaimer on it so that if it falls down killing everyone currently on it there's no comeback. Can't see too many people buying one off you or even walking over it.
As far as I can see, the quality software is the stuff that absolutely must work or it waste X billions or will cause major issues if found out - e.g. fly by wire, missile guidance, space programs, operating systems (can't sell hardware without it so no cash in door).
That, and the stuff that people do for love - Quake, OpenSource.
Slashdot Mirror
I am not so sure. I applied heavy pressure to convert my Mum to Ubuntu due to the state of her Windows install meaning that basically nothing worked consistently anymore anyway. The heavy part was required as she had no understanding of any of it, so change == bad. Now, no calls, no issues - have checked. All just works. For basic non-power users (i.e. just browsing, email, simple word processing) it takes some beating in terms of no issues, runs on windows hardware happily (roll on simple Mac installs?). The only issue I can see is that if you hand a linux system over and they have a problem with it, they are going to be forced repeat business unless they know a power user of their own...
Is it not time to stop slagging off new technology for the bad things that could be done with it and rather, try to put forwards some realistic approaches to how a modern civ. is going to deal with new technology in the future
- i.e. make some laws/guidelines that are slightly more future-proof than the ones we currently have.
I would much rather see someone talking about solutions that deal with the possible creation of some extremely serious technology.
Surely this can be fixed by
1. including copies of all the shared libs that you need in the installation
2. the OS merging binary identical libs when loading them into memory
- thus, shared libs without memory wastage and never another complaint about cant find lib X.
A smalltalk guy I know *loved* the fact that when you compiled a program it included everything in there so you never had a library conflict (if this is wrong, it's cos I've never actually used smalltalk).
I thought that intercal was Turing-complete? Like to see you write some code productively in that ;-)
I would say that the scientific body of the government should be doing research into rapid learning techniques - for the other members of the Whitehouse ;-)
But without the AOL users...
I guess if they let any TV network own as many channels as they want, then they too can use M$s "embrace and destroy" method of market domination by just buying all the small competition.
Not convinced about the idea that this won't stop new entrants into the market place and any that do appear will get rapidly snapped up by one of the big 3 to be.
That prospect has Amazon, Microsoft Corp. and a coalition of other technology companies worried that those gatekeepers could prevent users from looking at certain content
How many consumers would seriously put up with internet content being blocked if it's not the suppliers companies content?
Maybe certain ISPs would be born that are basically a new version of TV channels - only their content but provided for a lower price...
Two reasons that software is not of the level of quality that people seem for some reason to expect (that of bridges obviously).
1. Supposed Coders/Poets are also expected to be testers.
I don't see why this is expected. You don't get the guy from Porsche/Ferrari who draws the design of how the car is supposed to look to actually build it down to the last nut and test every element of it.
In my experience, coders and testers have a vastly different view of the world and the one cannot do the others job anywhere near as well.
No coder should be without a tester - then at least the software I produced would be a lot better (proved to me on 2 projects done with a dedicated tester).
2. Where is the comeback when someone writes some useless code? No comeback to either the company or the individuals.
Try building a bridge and putting a disclaimer on it so that if it falls down killing everyone currently on it there's no comeback. Can't see too many people buying one off you or even walking over it.
As far as I can see, the quality software is the stuff that absolutely must work or it waste X billions or will cause major issues if found out - e.g. fly by wire, missile guidance, space programs, operating systems (can't sell hardware without it so no cash in door).
That, and the stuff that people do for love - Quake, OpenSource.