Yeah, so that's two Apple formats (AIFF, Apple Lossless), one that isn't really used by anyone other than Apple (AAC), one totally useless for digital music storage (WAV) and one that they absolutely have to have to even compete in the market (MP3). Really great codec support.
If any of those other than MP3 account for more than 1% of the market, I'd be really surprised. And you know what: I'm betting that number 2 in terms of market share is a format that Apple does not support, namely WMA.
But it doesn't really matter whether a given unsupported format has a market share of 0.00001% or 100%. My point was that if I personally have a significant amount of music in that format, I have no use for Apple's iPod firmware and Rockbox is interesting because it supports a wide variety of codecs.
Very funny. You know, if you actually happened to have some music in that format, or any other that iPods don't support (and iPods are pretty bad as supporting a variety of audio formats goes) I think you'd find that no matter how absolutely reality-distortingly fantastic the original iPod firmware is in every other regard, it's pretty damn useless if you cannot listen to your music.
You don't even have to willingly rip your music to Vorbis - maybe you like listening to Net labels such as this one.
Much less than it would cause in an FPS environment. As MMORPGs are seldom as latency-critical as FPSs, I don't see anything except heavy macroing representing a problem, but then that's really a problem with the whole game genre even macros aside, gameplay ought not to be unchallenging enough to be possible to perform automate. Anyway, MUDs have been dealing with an open environment.
That may well be the case but I see it very problematic that normal citizens are unable to understand what exactly the laws their government imposes on them are saying. Or that they are forced to accept legal agreements written in the same language every day.
Legalese should really strive to be readable and understandable to the point by the average person. If indeed what you are saying is true and there is really no way to state these things in a clear and logical way then some kind of measures should be taken to ensure that everyone can get the help they need in interpreting the arcane mumblings of the law.
Easy. When they couldn't upgrade the Powerbook's processor they turned to adding value otherwise. The current powerbooks are stacked with special features that you won't find on a similarly-priced x86 laptop. Now that they've moved on to a much more expensive processor, they have to cut the costs a little but I'm actually impressed by how much of what makes the Powerbook special remains while the price-point is the same.
I seriously doubt the average will remain that high for long. Right now the people that have bought the console are the early adopter crowd who naturally are more into gaming than a typical console buyer and will get more games.
I'd like to know if this isn't just normal behavior in the first months of any console launch but I suspect it'll be difficult to find numbers for comparison.
If the rate remains as high even a few months later when there are already millions of Xbox360s sold, MS have definitely done something right. Relatively strong (even if it lacks a killer title like Halo) launch lineup might be a factor in this...
According to Wikipedia that 500k for the PS2 you mention was in the first 24 hours while the Xbox 360 has managed to gather the 400k figure in a week though.
This Gamespy article states that the PS2 actually sold 980k units by the end of the second day after launch. This is the Japanese market we're talking so it doesn't really say much after all but at least the Xbox 360 is very unlikely to reach similar figures in Japan and isn't doing it in the US which is a larger market (the PS2 has sold nearly twice the number of consoles in the US compared to Japan). The PlayStation 2 did instantly sell the 500k stock they had available during launch in the US as well though.
Another interesting little detail you can find in the Wikipedia article is that the previous opening day record was 225k for the Sega Dreamcast and we all know how well that worked out in the long run. DC's sales slowed rapidly after a good start. In any case, I think it's a little early to say anything about the 360's success after only one week.
I'd rather look at the votes that were given to the strongly worded statement that would have made it necessary to immediately start preparing a new version of the law. Many representatives voted for that one and I suspect they didn't bother trying to get the whole law rejected because they felt it would not be possible and instead aimed for a compromise.
Just use a Jabber client that supports GNUPG message encryption such as Psi. That way no-one in the middle will see your messages unencrypted.
Even if you trusted Google, TLS might not be present on server-to-server communication if you're talking to a person on another jabber server (and you'd have to trust that server as well) or the other user might not be using TLS when talking to their server.
Come on, it does look significantly better than Quake and the engine is pretty far from the original Quake one at this point.
Unreal Tournament 2004 is basically just Unreal with enhanced graphics etc. It's true since the engine has evolved from the original AFAIK.
Compared to Quake, Nexuiz has completely different physics, netcode, renderer, uses different map and model format, all the content is new and so on and so on.
Uh huh, where to start... How this got modded up is beyond me. Clearly a troll.
Stallman believes that if you like proprietary software then you're an idiot who does not deserve to use a computer.
That's just slander. Do you have any comment implying something like this from RMS? I've never seen one.
He also believes that all software should be "free" (but only per his definition of "free" - remember, to him BSD is not free, but to us BSD folks the GPL is not free, so it's a stalemate) and that all non-GPL software should be released under the GPL. He even goes so far as to clone some software and release it under the GPL, and to fork other open projects that he feels are not "free" enough (i.e., that don't use the GPL). Talk about a waste of effort! Don't add new features to a program, rather re-write it from scratch because you like the code but not the license.
Bullshit. Try reading a bit on the FSF website. BSD is specifically identified as a free software license as are lots of others and they have a very clear definition of free software you can use to judge licenses for yourself.
He may prefer the GPL because of copyleft but the GNU project itself chose X (which is MIT licensed) as their windowing system because it was free and ready.
This article isn't about recreating something that isn't GPL either. It's about what happened with Motif and Qt all over again. And he wasn't even talking about a rewrite. KDE used Qt back when it was still non-free and that prompted the creation of GNOME.
Using something like Java has real consequences. For *users*. People on *BSD, BeOS will have a hard time porting/running your software when there is no official JRE offered. Or you could happen to be running Linux on a somewhat less usual processor architechture.
What has Stallman done that's original thought (the GPL doesn't count, I'm talking working code)? What hasn't he simply cloned for religious purposes? He didn't like the emacs license, so he cloned it
*Sigh* Trolling real hard, aren't you?
First of all, why would the GPL not count when it could be argued that it's one of the main reasons for free software's success and is used by something like 70% of free software?
Second, EMACS is very well known to be the original work of RMS and he also wrote the original GNU C compiler. Many of the essential system utilities you use if you're using a GNU/Linux system are a result of the work of the GNU project. I won't even bother commenting on your idiotic remarks on GCJ.
I must thank him, though, because his stupid insistance that every Linux distribution is "GNU/Linux" so turned me off that I started looking at the various BSDs as an alternative, and I found them so much better than Linux that I no longer have any Linux in my house, just *BSD and Windows.
Your beloved BSD still uses some GNU components though. Such as the GNU Compiler Collection which includes "Stallman's Java-clone" and is used to compile each and every application you're using. And don't even get me started on the various GPLed parts. If you're using FreeBSD it also is pretty frustrating to install OpenOffice.org from ports because of the Java dependency. Fortunately Java compiles out of the box so you can still use it. On some other BSD that may not be the case and there are no guarantees that a newer version will still work. Time to go using Windows exclusively, maybe? After all, it has such a nice and free license and everything they do is completely original instead of cloning stuff and then releasing it under the restrictive GPL license.
Others have already commented that the original Airport does work (I'm currently typing this on a clamshell iBook with Ubuntu, connected thru airport) but as to why it's taking so long I'd venture to guess that solutions such as ndiswrapper are partly to blame. In addition to that, while there are numerous 802.11b chipset drivers available, the only fully free software driver for a 802.11g chipset is the prism54. There might be something making this somewhat more difficult with the 54Mbps chipsets. Or maybe most of the 802.11b drivers were written by people employed by the same companies that now are only willing give us binary-only drivers.
Re:Perhaps the SCM Solution is not the problem
on
Linus Drops BitKeeper
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
On the other hand the BSDs have been forked to four separate versions because someone has wanted to redo a certain part. The rewrites on Linux have always been improvements and in the case of ipfw etc. the kernel still retains compatibility to the older schemes.
You seem to be saying that everything should be done only once and done right. I don't buy that. What may initially seem like a good idea can always be shadowed by a better one someone has later. You also can't write a piece of software as large as a kernel by planning each part to be the best and as feature-complete as it can or you'll end up like the Hurd. This is particularly true in the open source development process. Had Linus originally planned for Linux 2.6 when he started writing it I doubt we'd have Linux now.
John Carmack reasons very simple from a game developer point of view. Basically anything that gets in the way of direct access to the hardware annoys him. This way of thinking about writing software is not really suitable for mobile development. The problem with writing software for mobile phones (and pdas) is that you need to target as much phones as possible because typically a phone will only be on the market for a short period of time (a few months) and there are a lot of different phones. So if you want marketshare, forget about native C, direct on hardware type solutions. You need to abstract from as much hardware (cpu, memory, screen size, network, storage, input) and software details (which j2me specs, native os, jit or no jit) as possible. That's what J2ME is all about.
Didn't you read his blog entry? He specifically mentions that this is not an excuse because in the end you effectively don't get any more portability than you would using the faster techniques. This is the promise, but at least according to Carmack it just doesn't work that way with the various implementations.
The original parent's post was based on the premise that it is unethical to not share. Whether the law permits this or not doesn't help in doing the right thing, it's irrelevant. There exists no inherent moral right to control duplication of information.
The idea here is that you're not trampling on their (moral) rights, they are on yours and that justifies infringing copyright.
Laws are just laws and if your system of values disagrees with them, there's nothing wrong in breaking them. When it's as widespread as it is with filesharing, this could be called "Civil disobedience" and often ultimately results in changing the relevant laws.
If you happen to believe in the idea that not sharing is unethical there may still be other issues such as breaching the author's trust. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on those and whether the base premise here is a good one but now you're basically advocating respect of the establishment.
The one I have is more specifically a combined ADSL router, miniswitch and a WLAN access point. It's called DSL-G604T. This one does run Linux, you can get a shell on it and change the firmware to a custom made one if you wish.
You can't change the kernel to whatever you want because both the ADSL and WLAN drivers are closed.
Still, it's a nice device that I know is based on dependable software for the most part. Finding the "GNU GPL Notice" inside the box it came in was pretty cool.
It's a complicated issue. You can see what Linus has to say about it here.
FSF also has a relevant answer in the GPL FAQ here.
While the issue is unclear and only courts could give a definitive answer on it (lawyers could give an educated guess and I assume the companies writing binary modules have asked them for it) it is definitely against the spirit of the GPL to write a module for a GPLed program and then keep it closed.
In my opinion even if binary-only modules happen to be legal they still aren't morally right.
FSF has also been taking action against GPL infringers for a long time now AFAIK.
Some infringers do get away with it, one such case was a proprietary messenger application misappropriating Psi's code, but the defense is available if the developers are willing. Another sad case for me are the Linux kernel binary-only modules which apparently aren't perfectly legal either, yet I myself have a D-Link router that contains several. No-one is sure what the court would find on those, though.
This is very interesting to me since I only recently wondered about using a picture of such a work.
According to Wikipedia (they need to use a lot of pictures), exact photographic copies of two dimensional public domain images can't be protected by copyright in the US because they lack originality. So it would seem that: No, they can't place such a restriction these works.
The examples given of Mänti bear an odd resemblance to finnish words with similar meaning. Might be that the point is the language structure etc. and he's knowingly using slight modification from existing languages but I found this rather interesting:
Mänti: This is close to the finnish word "mänty" which means a pine tree (the article noted that Mänti is a type of tree)
Ema: "Emo" is a finnish word for mother, usually used when speaking of animals
Ela: Elo is a word meaning life in Finnish
Päive: the finnish word for this is Päivä
the only one example not near a finnish word is Päike for sun. I'm thinking he might've gotten the words from Estonian since he mentions that he likes it. Estonian has a strong resemblance to finnish and I can read it somewhat if I try because a lot of the words can be deduced from finnish. Maybe someone from Estonia here might be able to tell if there's an even stronger resemblance to it. I hope the rest of the language isn't a subconscious rewrite on another language as well.
I don't know if Prime95 double checks all keys but if it doesn't, that might not be a very nice idea. There'll be a chance of the overclocked CPU doing miscalculation even if it keeps running ok otherwise and you might cause the project to miss a prime.
And all that is required from a rootkit for defeating this check is for it to not fake the checksums or hide any files? It'll hardly be an all-encompassing solution then. Do that many current (Linux) rootkits even bother to fake the sums?
A fairly interesting way to find rootkits but it can be only used in addition to the existing tools which does eliminate some of the elegance, doesn't it?
You do realize that Wine users could be wanting to run a perfectly legitimate copy of any other Microsoft program than Windows and want updates for it? This is also mentioned in the mailing list message linked to in the summary.
I shouldn't really bother replying as I was already mostly treating this as an attempt to tell you a bit about what exists but I'll comment just a little.
The interfaces are open and documented. If a third party fails to add support for open interfaces, whose fault is it?
Doesn't matter whose fault it is. The end result is lack of integration.
Office is. iLife is not. The difference between a "suite" and just a bunch of programs sold under the same part number is that the programs that make up a "suite" only interoperate with each other through non-published interfaces.
According to this definition KDE and GNOME are not suites either.
You've lost control completely and have spun off into meaningless generalities. We're not talking in generalities. We're talking in specifics. Linux is bad because it fails to make tasks that should be easy, easy. Tasks like listening to music, scheduling your time, chatting with people you know, organizing your photos and putting your home movies on DVD. Linux makes these things hard, and there is no excuse for that at all.
I do have complaints about Aqua but the bigger problem with you is the attitude. You seem to see Apple as God who can't go wrong anywhere and pointing out any annoyance just results in a reply along the lines of "not a problem for me". It's just useless to go into specifics with you. I'm sure you don't care the least about virtual desktops, a spatial file manager and thinking OS X is slow is laughable. Just like you don't need any feature in any given program if Apple hasn't implemented it. In fact the feature must be ugly, illegal or something else as bad.
How can you compare on performance? Linux is not faster for key tasks because key tasks are not possible on Linux. Or, as you insist so stridently, they are possible but they are so hard they require the user to study a tutorial. Who cares how fast the computer runs? People care whether they can do what they want to do. Linux loses.
You're probably surprised to hear this but performance can be measured without doing basic GUI computing tasks and OS performance is useful even when you're not creating a DVD with iDVD. Even while you insist that nothing on linux can be used, things like web serving can still be done with it and as both operating systems use the same web server, their performance can be compared too
Network transparency? Utter nonsense. Never the right solution for the problem. But if you absolutely have to do that, use the bundled X11 software that comes with Mac OS X. You'll hate it, because using it will remind you of how pitifully obsolete that technology is, but it's better than just getting rid of everything modern and going back to the computer equivalent of the stone age.
The OS X X11 is useless because your desktop is full of programs that do not support it. Not so with GNU/Linux.
Hardware support? What hardware do you need to support? This is a Mac we're talking about here. It supports everything.
Macs don't support all hardware. Try getting a random USB WLAN card or some other device that's more complicated than a memory stick and chances are it won't work with your lovely OS X.
Software installation? What's better than dragging an icon into a folder? There is no "installation." You just copy.
OS X doesn't have drag and drop software installation. They tried to have at first, but gave up and OS X has installers today. It just wasn't feasible in a modern operating system. Drag and drop still would not solve the isse of getting the software on your computer and keeping it up to date even if it worked. These things are done very well on the various Linux distributions. Clicking on a checkbox and pressing install, watchi
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, so that's two Apple formats (AIFF, Apple Lossless), one that isn't really used by anyone other than Apple (AAC), one totally useless for digital music storage (WAV) and one that they absolutely have to have to even compete in the market (MP3). Really great codec support.
If any of those other than MP3 account for more than 1% of the market, I'd be really surprised. And you know what: I'm betting that number 2 in terms of market share is a format that Apple does not support, namely WMA.
But it doesn't really matter whether a given unsupported format has a market share of 0.00001% or 100%. My point was that if I personally have a significant amount of music in that format, I have no use for Apple's iPod firmware and Rockbox is interesting because it supports a wide variety of codecs.
Very funny. You know, if you actually happened to have some music in that format, or any other that iPods don't support (and iPods are pretty bad as supporting a variety of audio formats goes) I think you'd find that no matter how absolutely reality-distortingly fantastic the original iPod firmware is in every other regard, it's pretty damn useless if you cannot listen to your music.
You don't even have to willingly rip your music to Vorbis - maybe you like listening to Net labels such as this one.
Much less than it would cause in an FPS environment. As MMORPGs are seldom as latency-critical as FPSs, I don't see anything except heavy macroing representing a problem, but then that's really a problem with the whole game genre even macros aside, gameplay ought not to be unchallenging enough to be possible to perform automate. Anyway, MUDs have been dealing with an open environment.
That may well be the case but I see it very problematic that normal citizens are unable to understand what exactly the laws their government imposes on them are saying. Or that they are forced to accept legal agreements written in the same language every day.
Legalese should really strive to be readable and understandable to the point by the average person. If indeed what you are saying is true and there is really no way to state these things in a clear and logical way then some kind of measures should be taken to ensure that everyone can get the help they need in interpreting the arcane mumblings of the law.
Easy. When they couldn't upgrade the Powerbook's processor they turned to adding value otherwise. The current powerbooks are stacked with special features that you won't find on a similarly-priced x86 laptop. Now that they've moved on to a much more expensive processor, they have to cut the costs a little but I'm actually impressed by how much of what makes the Powerbook special remains while the price-point is the same.
I seriously doubt the average will remain that high for long. Right now the people that have bought the console are the early adopter crowd who naturally are more into gaming than a typical console buyer and will get more games.
I'd like to know if this isn't just normal behavior in the first months of any console launch but I suspect it'll be difficult to find numbers for comparison.
If the rate remains as high even a few months later when there are already millions of Xbox360s sold, MS have definitely done something right. Relatively strong (even if it lacks a killer title like Halo) launch lineup might be a factor in this...
This Gamespy article states that the PS2 actually sold 980k units by the end of the second day after launch. This is the Japanese market we're talking so it doesn't really say much after all but at least the Xbox 360 is very unlikely to reach similar figures in Japan and isn't doing it in the US which is a larger market (the PS2 has sold nearly twice the number of consoles in the US compared to Japan). The PlayStation 2 did instantly sell the 500k stock they had available during launch in the US as well though.
Another interesting little detail you can find in the Wikipedia article is that the previous opening day record was 225k for the Sega Dreamcast and we all know how well that worked out in the long run. DC's sales slowed rapidly after a good start. In any case, I think it's a little early to say anything about the 360's success after only one week.
I'd rather look at the votes that were given to the strongly worded statement that would have made it necessary to immediately start preparing a new version of the law. Many representatives voted for that one and I suspect they didn't bother trying to get the whole law rejected because they felt it would not be possible and instead aimed for a compromise.
Even if you trusted Google, TLS might not be present on server-to-server communication if you're talking to a person on another jabber server (and you'd have to trust that server as well) or the other user might not be using TLS when talking to their server.
Oh really? I guess you've never seen this ad then?
Come on, it does look significantly better than Quake and the engine is pretty far from the original Quake one at this point.
Unreal Tournament 2004 is basically just Unreal with enhanced graphics etc. It's true since the engine has evolved from the original AFAIK.
Compared to Quake, Nexuiz has completely different physics, netcode, renderer, uses different map and model format, all the content is new and so on and so on.
That's just slander. Do you have any comment implying something like this from RMS? I've never seen one.
Bullshit. Try reading a bit on the FSF website. BSD is specifically identified as a free software license as are lots of others and they have a very clear definition of free software you can use to judge licenses for yourself.
He may prefer the GPL because of copyleft but the GNU project itself chose X (which is MIT licensed) as their windowing system because it was free and ready.
This article isn't about recreating something that isn't GPL either. It's about what happened with Motif and Qt all over again. And he wasn't even talking about a rewrite. KDE used Qt back when it was still non-free and that prompted the creation of GNOME.
Using something like Java has real consequences. For *users*. People on *BSD, BeOS will have a hard time porting/running your software when there is no official JRE offered. Or you could happen to be running Linux on a somewhat less usual processor architechture.
*Sigh* Trolling real hard, aren't you?First of all, why would the GPL not count when it could be argued that it's one of the main reasons for free software's success and is used by something like 70% of free software?
Second, EMACS is very well known to be the original work of RMS and he also wrote the original GNU C compiler. Many of the essential system utilities you use if you're using a GNU/Linux system are a result of the work of the GNU project. I won't even bother commenting on your idiotic remarks on GCJ.
Your beloved BSD still uses some GNU components though. Such as the GNU Compiler Collection which includes "Stallman's Java-clone" and is used to compile each and every application you're using. And don't even get me started on the various GPLed parts. If you're using FreeBSD it also is pretty frustrating to install OpenOffice.org from ports because of the Java dependency. Fortunately Java compiles out of the box so you can still use it. On some other BSD that may not be the case and there are no guarantees that a newer version will still work. Time to go using Windows exclusively, maybe? After all, it has such a nice and free license and everything they do is completely original instead of cloning stuff and then releasing it under the restrictive GPL license.
Others have already commented that the original Airport does work (I'm currently typing this on a clamshell iBook with Ubuntu, connected thru airport) but as to why it's taking so long I'd venture to guess that solutions such as ndiswrapper are partly to blame. In addition to that, while there are numerous 802.11b chipset drivers available, the only fully free software driver for a 802.11g chipset is the prism54. There might be something making this somewhat more difficult with the 54Mbps chipsets. Or maybe most of the 802.11b drivers were written by people employed by the same companies that now are only willing give us binary-only drivers.
On the other hand the BSDs have been forked to four separate versions because someone has wanted to redo a certain part. The rewrites on Linux have always been improvements and in the case of ipfw etc. the kernel still retains compatibility to the older schemes.
You seem to be saying that everything should be done only once and done right. I don't buy that. What may initially seem like a good idea can always be shadowed by a better one someone has later. You also can't write a piece of software as large as a kernel by planning each part to be the best and as feature-complete as it can or you'll end up like the Hurd. This is particularly true in the open source development process. Had Linus originally planned for Linux 2.6 when he started writing it I doubt we'd have Linux now.
Didn't you read his blog entry? He specifically mentions that this is not an excuse because in the end you effectively don't get any more portability than you would using the faster techniques. This is the promise, but at least according to Carmack it just doesn't work that way with the various implementations.
The original parent's post was based on the premise that it is unethical to not share. Whether the law permits this or not doesn't help in doing the right thing, it's irrelevant. There exists no inherent moral right to control duplication of information.
The idea here is that you're not trampling on their (moral) rights, they are on yours and that justifies infringing copyright.
Laws are just laws and if your system of values disagrees with them, there's nothing wrong in breaking them. When it's as widespread as it is with filesharing, this could be called "Civil disobedience" and often ultimately results in changing the relevant laws.
If you happen to believe in the idea that not sharing is unethical there may still be other issues such as breaching the author's trust. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on those and whether the base premise here is a good one but now you're basically advocating respect of the establishment.
You can't change the kernel to whatever you want because both the ADSL and WLAN drivers are closed.
Still, it's a nice device that I know is based on dependable software for the most part. Finding the "GNU GPL Notice" inside the box it came in was pretty cool.
FSF also has a relevant answer in the GPL FAQ here.
While the issue is unclear and only courts could give a definitive answer on it (lawyers could give an educated guess and I assume the companies writing binary modules have asked them for it) it is definitely against the spirit of the GPL to write a module for a GPLed program and then keep it closed.
In my opinion even if binary-only modules happen to be legal they still aren't morally right.
FSF has also been taking action against GPL infringers for a long time now AFAIK.
Some infringers do get away with it, one such case was a proprietary messenger application misappropriating Psi's code, but the defense is available if the developers are willing. Another sad case for me are the Linux kernel binary-only modules which apparently aren't perfectly legal either, yet I myself have a D-Link router that contains several. No-one is sure what the court would find on those, though.
According to Wikipedia (they need to use a lot of pictures), exact photographic copies of two dimensional public domain images can't be protected by copyright in the US because they lack originality. So it would seem that: No, they can't place such a restriction these works.
This has a precedent in Bridgeman Art Library vs. Corel Corporation.
Now what I'd really like to know is how does this compare to other countries.
The examples given of Mänti bear an odd resemblance to finnish words with similar meaning. Might be that the point is the language structure etc. and he's knowingly using slight modification from existing languages but I found this rather interesting:
Mänti: This is close to the finnish word "mänty" which means a pine tree (the article noted that Mänti is a type of tree)
Ema: "Emo" is a finnish word for mother, usually used when speaking of animals
Ela: Elo is a word meaning life in Finnish
Päive: the finnish word for this is Päivä
the only one example not near a finnish word is Päike for sun. I'm thinking he might've gotten the words from Estonian since he mentions that he likes it. Estonian has a strong resemblance to finnish and I can read it somewhat if I try because a lot of the words can be deduced from finnish. Maybe someone from Estonia here might be able to tell if there's an even stronger resemblance to it. I hope the rest of the language isn't a subconscious rewrite on another language as well.
Distributed.net has this to say on overclocking.
A fairly interesting way to find rootkits but it can be only used in addition to the existing tools which does eliminate some of the elegance, doesn't it?
You do realize that Wine users could be wanting to run a perfectly legitimate copy of any other Microsoft program than Windows and want updates for it? This is also mentioned in the mailing list message linked to in the summary.
Doesn't matter whose fault it is. The end result is lack of integration.
According to this definition KDE and GNOME are not suites either.
I do have complaints about Aqua but the bigger problem with you is the attitude. You seem to see Apple as God who can't go wrong anywhere and pointing out any annoyance just results in a reply along the lines of "not a problem for me". It's just useless to go into specifics with you. I'm sure you don't care the least about virtual desktops, a spatial file manager and thinking OS X is slow is laughable. Just like you don't need any feature in any given program if Apple hasn't implemented it. In fact the feature must be ugly, illegal or something else as bad.
You're probably surprised to hear this but performance can be measured without doing basic GUI computing tasks and OS performance is useful even when you're not creating a DVD with iDVD. Even while you insist that nothing on linux can be used, things like web serving can still be done with it and as both operating systems use the same web server, their performance can be compared too
The OS X X11 is useless because your desktop is full of programs that do not support it. Not so with GNU/Linux.
Macs don't support all hardware. Try getting a random USB WLAN card or some other device that's more complicated than a memory stick and chances are it won't work with your lovely OS X.
OS X doesn't have drag and drop software installation. They tried to have at first, but gave up and OS X has installers today. It just wasn't feasible in a modern operating system. Drag and drop still would not solve the isse of getting the software on your computer and keeping it up to date even if it worked. These things are done very well on the various Linux distributions. Clicking on a checkbox and pressing install, watchi