Which brings us back to the point - I can understand why you run Linux on the desktop, but expecting serious gamers to do so is rather silly.
Oh- we have no quarrel. My original response was to someone who is not a serious gamer who occasionally wants to play a game. I am not in a fantasy world- Linux is not going to make a gamer happy... at least, not in the foreseeable future. Cedega is a major step, and fills a nice need for many people who choose to run Linux but want some MS-Windows games without rebooting. Still, it is not for everyone, and has its limits.
but (heresy!) I have yet to think up a good reason why I would ever use Linux on the desktop.
Can't say why YOU might want to use it on the desktop, but there are many reasons for ME to use Linux on the desktop:
No big brother watching/controlling:)
Faster and more stable
Better use of resources
More secure. No virii or malware
Allows me access to all the Unix tools and scripting
Much better control over customizing my environment
Most advanced 3D desktop (Beryl)
BTW- I do agree with you that controllers do suck, at least for FPS games. But for his occasional gaming urge, booting in MS-Windows isn't THAT "at best, inconvenient". Me? I haven't had MS-Windows installed on my desktops for many years now. On the very rare occasion I HAVE to do something in that realm, I still have a dualboot on my (much less used) notebook computer (I think it was booted in MS-Windows twice, last time being a year ago).
everytime I try to make my house Linux-only, my gaming itch flares up and I bang my head against Wine for a while before breaking down and re-installing Windows.
Then buy a game console?? (Just a thought)
In any case, you CAN have a dual boot machine for such occasions... it isn't the end of the world. For me, if it doesn't exist or run under Linux, I have no interest in it anymore.
My gaming days are now over (RSI), but when I was having fun, there were plenty of good Linux games to keep me busy- and most of those were purchased, commercial games (doomX, RCW, SIMX, Empires, Heros, Heretic, QuakeX, NWN, Myth, SOF, etc). But it does seem like there are considerably fewer commercial games now than there was, say, six years ago.
My all-time favorite game is/was RCW (Return to Castle Wolfenstien). No matter how much pain, if they produce a RCW2 for Linux of the same caliber, I will buy and play it.
For the ideologues, knowing that there's one less piece of non-free software on your system is a real comfort. For me, personally, all that apparently remains are ATI drivers and Flash Player.
Nvidia core, certain wireless drivers, Quicktime, Windows Media, etc.
There is still a handfull of important non-GPL stuff out there, although it does seem to be getting better all the time. The only major dark cloud for open OS's will be DRM (and of course, the ever threating and horrible software patent nightmare).
Flash *might* make it to the GPL zone, eventually... hard to say.
That's a red herring. You're already using the term "convicted monopoly". That's kinda' like calling somebody that disagrees with the government a "terrorist". Welcome to 1984.
Well I am sorry if you don't like that fact that Microsoft is a multiple-time convicted monopoly... but they are. Calling them that is just fact.
There is nothing stopping people from choosing what software they would like to use on their computer.
Um, yes there is. If you are in the minority of people that want to purchase a machine WITHOUT MS-Windows because you already OWN something to install or want something different, then you have nothing to buy in the vast majority of stores out there. And those few where you CAN find something often cost just as much as with- another negative effect of the bundling. Don't believe me- go try to find an (non-apple) laptop inside a Circuit City, Best Buy, Walmart, Sears, whatever, without the MS-Windows tax. Good luck.
However, you seem to be in favor of the government coercing a private business by force. Sounds like DoubleSpeak to me.
Poor, innocent little Microsoft. I suppose we should throw all anti-trust laws away and let the huge corporations fight dirty until there is one computer company left.
I don't think you read my entire posting. I said one solution would be to allow the manufacturer to install and configure and "value add" MS-Windows but not LICENSE it to the end user... that part would be up to the end user. If the user chooses to buy the license (perhaps from the same vendor/retailer), then they enter the number (no harder than the existing registration junk) and everything is like it used to be. If they choose to use another OS and not license it, that is fine too- they save the cost and get the hardware they want. Everyone "wins" (even MS, who continues to sell licenses).
And no, you really can't buy many machines without an OS today as you point out. Walk into any retailer and see if you have success. The few machines that don't have an OS cost as much or MORE than ones without (low volume)... an effect of the bundling. Unbundling would solve that too.
You are so right. Convicted monopolies should have less rights than the consumer. The customer should be free to choose what they want to pay for when buying a computer.
About the only we would gain some freedom from Microsoft's OS monopoly would be to take some serious action, such as:
1) Enforce all existing antitrust laws (this is not being done) 2) Require that computer manufacturers not be allowed to bundle/include an MS-Windows license 3) Prevent MS from trying to lock the OS license to a particular computer
Never gonna happen, but it is nice to dream. None of the other so-called anti-trust penalties against Microsoft have had any teeth/impact. If you could ONLY buy computers without an OS, the manufacturers could produce a quick-load, quick-start CD/DVD that walks the user through installing an optional, separately purchased MS-Windows license. Or- allow the pre-installation of MS-Windows with with no license. Optional licenses must be purchased separately from a different source (could be same vendor, but not the hardware manufacturer).
The bundling/preinstallation/forced-licensing are what has given MS almost absolute control over the market. Why unbundle?
1) It would allow real competition- forcing MS to innovate and lowering prices 2) It would show consumers that there are alternatives 3) It would mean the consumer could actually see the prices of what they are buying 4) It would allow the customer to not pay a MS tax on any computer model they wished to buy 5) It would help equalize the disparity between the OEM and aftermarket price of MS-Windows 6) Businesses would not be forced to buy licenses twice when they choose to have a corporate license structure with reimaging on installation.
And even all this would only address the OS Monopoly, not the control MS has over other segments of the industry.
Oh, there's a difference. The higher-end DSLRs are very, very fast on that first shot. And more importantly, can sustain that speed. I routinely shoot 30-frame bursts at 5 or 6 frames per second, with the camera continually refocusing throughout. That sort of stuff is strictly DSLR.
That is a good point- of course, the article didn't define exactly what he meant, nor did he ever mention burst speed. The 828 is plenty fast on the first shot. And it does have a limited burst mode. But the burst mode is not as fast as a DSLR, and it is only a few pictures.
I believe the author would have done much more justice to have better defined which type of non-SLR cameras he was comparing to. There is often as much difference between a pocket non-DSLR and a high-end, large-lensed/bodyied, full featured non-DSRL as there is between most DSLR's and non-DSLR's.
While I generally agree with the article, it REALLY depends on what non-SLR camera you are comparing to. For example, if I address his 10 points compared to a high-end Sony 828 non-SLR digital camera:
1) Creative Control: I have most of the same settings and control in the 828 as a DSLR: shutter speed, aperature, white balance, flash modes, color balance, histogram, etc. 2) Superior Sensors: The 828's is nice, but it can't compare to most DSLR's... but that doesn't mean newer non-DSLR's will remain behind the sensor technology curve. 3) Less Noise: Not a terrible problem on the 828 4) Accessories Galore: Yep- gotta hand that over to the SLR's. The 828 can use various flashes, memory, filters, but the lens is fixed. 5) No Shutter Lag: I find the "lag" on the 828 to be minimal. The DSLR's are faster at focusing, but from the time it is focused I see no difference in speed from pressing the button fully down and it taking the picture on the 828 vs. the DSLR's I have used. 6) Instant Startup: Again, what is he comparing to? The 828 is ready to shoot in under one second. 7) Higher Build Quality: 828 will stack up against most DSLR's 8) Viewfinder: Personally, I *like* using a live screen to shoot instead of a viewfinder. So I find the 828 superior to a DSLR in that case, but if you do WANT to use the viewfinder, the DSLR is better. This is probably the most important differentiating factor between the two. 9) Ergonomics: 828 is every bit as comfortable to me as a DSLR, plus it can shoot overhead or underfoot while watching the screen, something you cannot do with a DSLR at all. 10) Price: quality DSLR or non-DSLR, price is similar and not a factor anymore.
Interestingly, a company could easily make a quality non-DSLR camera with a larger sensor and interchangable lenses and most of what is left of the differences will just disappear. Then the consumer is left with the only REAL difference: Do you want to be forced to look through a viewfinder or want to primarily look at a screen? They each have advantages and disadvantages.
And features that the 828 has that I have not seen on the several DSLR's I have played with?
1) The 828 has a (visible) laser focus system for dim light that is extremely accurate. 2) The 828 has a sharper and closer macro mode than any DSLR-included lens I have seen. 3) As mentioned above, the 828 body can twist and allow the photographer to take pictures overhead and underfoot while still seeing what he is doing 4) The 828 has night modes (infrared) that are better than what DSLR's can typically emulate (although I don't find that feature to be all that useful- it is still noisy and, of course, black-and-white-only.) 5) The 828 has full-motion video recording at 640x480, none of the DSLR's I have seen support any type of movie recording.
With the non-free version of Mandriva, NVidia is always setup automatically and works out of the box with no effort. I believe that is also true of the non-free SuSe. The problem is that free distros (Free Mandriva, *buntu, Fedora, Debian, etc) can't do that, because the redistribution is not allowed that way by NVidia (unless I am wrong on that, and someone would care to elaborate).
However... it is entirely possible that free distros can arrange a "click on this" and it is downloaded on the fly and configured correctly.
And, to point out an error in the article... Yes, Mandriva 2007 will also set up and use AIGLX, BUT NOT FOR NVIDIA CARDS, because the stable driver does not support all the necessary AIGLX extentions necessary to fully run compiz. The beta version on the website does, but I have yet to get it to install cleanly and work with compiz... it is just a little too soon to expect it all to "just work" with compiz.
>Well, so then it's not a "free PC", it's a "free internet access terminal".
OK, then define "PC". That thing they are showing is a Personal Computer, in every way... only without a hard drive (it uses solid-state storage). And, it is also X86, making it at least mostly IBM-PC compatible.
> I doubt anyone's going to be running half-life or photoshop on that thing.
Neither is available for Linux, so that is moot. However, you could probably run many smaller games, and GIMP. The main obsticle with that type of machine is the lack of a hard drive... but they are probably going to have the user store most stuff (Email/pics/etc) on the server back at the ISP. In any case, it is probably just fitted to be an internet appliance... browser, IM, VOIP, Email, minimal desktop, minimal office applications, and a few games.... that would meet the needs of probably 75%+ of the population.
Even if such a thing could be done, it would probably be the WORST of both HD technologies. Perhaps a single layer of each? A single layer of Blueray is not enough for later. A single layer of HD-DVD is not enough for later. Then you get a damn "flippy disc", so there is no cool label, no side you can safely sit the disc on while moving them around, and no light protection if you forget and leave it on the desk and the sun shines on it for a while.
On top of that you have to pile the licensing fees for all three on top of the cost of the disc. And I have a feeling such a disc would be unreliable, at best.... playing in some devices and not others.
What is needed is a affordable, DUAL FORMAT HD PLAYER, not disc. Then the consumer can then "not care" what media they end up. In an ideal world, all blueray AND HD-DVD discs would both have DVD layers (on the same media side as the HD), so the consumer can also play the movie on the billions of existing devices out there, many that they already own.
A better comparison would be Kubuntu, not Ubuntu. Talk about silly though, the two projects (K/non K unbuntu) SHOULD have been merged together. It is just silly to have to do a separate install, just because you want a nice KDE environment or Gnome environment. Mandriva addresses that MUCH better (and always has... and long before any other distro did with as much elegance).
In any case, you are correct that Mandriva faces stiff competition from not only Kubuntu, but also SuSe and Fedora. They all have their advantages and disadvantages. We all like choice, but it does make you wonder just how far a Linux distro could go if all the energy from the dozens of distros went in to just a few.
In any case, to address your "two good releases in a row", that is exactly why Mandriva has moved to a yearly major update process instead of the older two or three times a year. There is good and bad in that, too. But I understand their logic.
I have played with the 3D stuff, and it is quite impressive. But it is also not very stable yet (at all). Plus, KDE's kwin doesn't "do" 3D yet, so you have to use an alien window manager, causing other issues.
Unfortunatly, I think it will be another year before the 3D desktop option will really be ready for general use.
Actually the Club version of Mandriva will automatically detect and use the proprietary drivers for both ATI and NVidia. That is in addition to Acrobat Reader, Flash, etc.
As much as I love MythTV, it will never meet my needs because it cannot and will not be compatible with any premium HDTV content. If all I cared about was crappy local network HD, then it would be OK. But I am far more interested in Discovery HD Theatre, HDNet, ParamountHD, etc... the only way to get those (and others) is through satelite or digial cable... neither of which is going to work with MythTV. Soon, DirecTV will offer *hundreds* of HDTV channels.
So I am still "stuck" with an HD TiVo + DirecTV. It is sad, too.... I thought the whole point of cablecard was going to be to allow third party hardware and software to operate seamlessly on proprietary and protected video networks. But I don't see that happening.
That is the problem. We will have to start defending ourselves all the time based on data collected "against" us. The burden of proof is shifting slowly from "innocent until proven guilty" to "guilty until proven innocent". Worse, it is immpossible to "defend" oneself from conclusions being made about us by agencies and businesses profiling us based on all kinds of data... of which they have more and more each year.
>Because the stupidity of some people really bugs me, so I have to tell them.
You would do better to hold your "tounge". Just because you don't understand something someone is saying, or you disagree with them, doesn't make them "stupid"... it just makes you arrogant when you call them "stupid".
>You can do that without any tags as well: just look at the house in front of which the bin is placed
If there is an automated system for gathering such information, it is highly unlikely that a machine can do that with any success, speed, or accuracy.
>A neighbour could as well have dropped his garbage in your bin and vice versa. [...]
Nobody said this was infallible. There are lots of ways that errors can creep into such a system, which is all the more scary.
>All I want to say is that this is pure paranoia
One of my favourite quotes I have seen somewhere: "It is only paranoia if they aren't watching you".
>Well, they can already scan your garbage for tags now, this doesn't require a tag on the bin itself!. >Sorry, but how stupid are you?
Why must people like you resort to name calling? You do realize it makes you sound so juvenile.
"They" would need some type of ID on the trash can to use to associate the bin with a person/residence. Some RFID tags do have product information and do not require a transaction database in order to determine what it is. Then the two pieces of data- owner and product, could be associated.
You are a VERY trusting chap, aren't you? You can't possibly see how or why that same scanner could be used to quickly record every RFID in the bin. Isn't it "worthwhile" to be at least a little concerned about the possible abuses, as the number of items with RFID chips increases each year?
>Would you react the same way if they just write your name on your wheelie bin? I don't really see the difference.
Oh, I see a BIG difference. If they have a scanner on the trucks that can read RFID, they can read not only the tag on the bin, but also all the tags on the trash IN the bin. And it can happen VERY quickly. Furthermore, the huge majority of people won't know they were doing it, or what dangers that implies.
I think you are missing the point. We all know the obvious reasons they are doing it- and they are good reasons: preventing violations of trash rules, perhaps using it to charge people less that produce less waste, preventing people from stealing other's trashcans.
The problem is what it COULD be used for, which has nothing to do with the chap emptying the can. Imagine what a covert agency could discover about you or your family by instantly knowing and tracking future RFID tags! Based on staticical probabilites: how many people live with you, your sexual orientation, your sexual patterns, if you drink alcohol, aspects of how you raise your children, if you smoke, what kinds of high-risk foods you consume, if anything you buy "looks" like you are a terrorist and puts you under further (more intense) observation, medical conditions you might have, if the profile of your consumptions looks like you are using some kind of illegal drug, etc.
Of course, it is much EASIER to do that on the front-end, when you are buying the stuff. Since most people use trackable payment methods. But this is just another possible way to capture such information, even if you regularly pay cash.
The majority of people will claim "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about". But that is not what privacy and freedom are about. Knowledge is power. The more a government spys on and knows about its citizens, the more freedom COULD be taken away from you. The higher the probability mistakes would be made. The more you are forced into a stereotype box that you can't control and without your awareness or consent. The more the "improper" laws could be enforced.
I will give you an example. Most people would agree that speed limits are necessary to ensure public safety (I do too). But most people would NOT agree that means the government can install a device in your car that monitors your driving and auto-issues you a ticket if you go 1 MPH over the limit, and remembers this data for the rest of your life. Soon, it would then creep into limits on how hard you can accelerate. Or perhaps assume you are a bad driver if you had to break really hard. You will find yourself having to defend yourself against all kinds of data being gathered. People 50 years ago would have laughed at that, thinking it was impossible. It is certainly possible today. And tomorrow, perhaps it will be possible to use facial recognition everywhere, covertly, and track and record your every movement.
Technology is wonderful- it enables tremendous improvements in all aspects of life. But with it, there is a huge danger of abuse. The majority of people don't understand today's technology or how it COULD be used against them. And each year it gets a little more complex. Let's all hope there are enough people that understand how dangerous technology can be and help to educate those who don't understand. It is not about paranoia, it is about being a responsible person who wants to ensure that there are checks and balances on what information overt and covert government agencies (and businesses too) can collect and what they can do with it.
Slashdot Mirror
>they make digital media available only in proprietary DRM'd WMA format.
And most of the documentation is in MS-Word only format.
And the only client software so far is MS-Windows only.
Hmm
At least the server can run on Linux.
Oh- we have no quarrel. My original response was to someone who is not a serious gamer who occasionally wants to play a game. I am not in a fantasy world- Linux is not going to make a gamer happy... at least, not in the foreseeable future. Cedega is a major step, and fills a nice need for many people who choose to run Linux but want some MS-Windows games without rebooting. Still, it is not for everyone, and has its limits.
Can't say why YOU might want to use it on the desktop, but there are many reasons for ME to use Linux on the desktop:
No big brother watching/controlling
Faster and more stable
Better use of resources
More secure. No virii or malware
Allows me access to all the Unix tools and scripting
Much better control over customizing my environment
Most advanced 3D desktop (Beryl)
BTW- I do agree with you that controllers do suck, at least for FPS games. But for his occasional gaming urge, booting in MS-Windows isn't THAT "at best, inconvenient". Me? I haven't had MS-Windows installed on my desktops for many years now. On the very rare occasion I HAVE to do something in that realm, I still have a dualboot on my (much less used) notebook computer (I think it was booted in MS-Windows twice, last time being a year ago).
Then buy a game console?? (Just a thought)
In any case, you CAN have a dual boot machine for such occasions... it isn't the end of the world. For me, if it doesn't exist or run under Linux, I have no interest in it anymore.
My gaming days are now over (RSI), but when I was having fun, there were plenty of good Linux games to keep me busy- and most of those were purchased, commercial games (doomX, RCW, SIMX, Empires, Heros, Heretic, QuakeX, NWN, Myth, SOF, etc). But it does seem like there are considerably fewer commercial games now than there was, say, six years ago.
My all-time favorite game is/was RCW (Return to Castle Wolfenstien). No matter how much pain, if they produce a RCW2 for Linux of the same caliber, I will buy and play it.
There is still a handfull of important non-GPL stuff out there, although it does seem to be getting better all the time. The only major dark cloud for open OS's will be DRM (and of course, the ever threating and horrible software patent nightmare).
Flash *might* make it to the GPL zone, eventually... hard to say.
I don't think you read my entire posting. I said one solution would be to allow the manufacturer to install and configure and "value add" MS-Windows but not LICENSE it to the end user... that part would be up to the end user. If the user chooses to buy the license (perhaps from the same vendor/retailer), then they enter the number (no harder than the existing registration junk) and everything is like it used to be. If they choose to use another OS and not license it, that is fine too- they save the cost and get the hardware they want. Everyone "wins" (even MS, who continues to sell licenses). And no, you really can't buy many machines without an OS today as you point out. Walk into any retailer and see if you have success. The few machines that don't have an OS cost as much or MORE than ones without (low volume)... an effect of the bundling. Unbundling would solve that too.
You are so right. Convicted monopolies should have less rights than the consumer. The customer should be free to choose what they want to pay for when buying a computer.
About the only we would gain some freedom from Microsoft's OS monopoly would be to take some serious action, such as:
1) Enforce all existing antitrust laws (this is not being done)
2) Require that computer manufacturers not be allowed to bundle/include an MS-Windows license
3) Prevent MS from trying to lock the OS license to a particular computer
Never gonna happen, but it is nice to dream. None of the other so-called anti-trust penalties against Microsoft have had any teeth/impact. If you could ONLY buy computers without an OS, the manufacturers could produce a quick-load, quick-start CD/DVD that walks the user through installing an optional, separately purchased MS-Windows license. Or- allow the pre-installation of MS-Windows with with no license. Optional licenses must be purchased separately from a different source (could be same vendor, but not the hardware manufacturer).
The bundling/preinstallation/forced-licensing are what has given MS almost absolute control over the market. Why unbundle?
1) It would allow real competition- forcing MS to innovate and lowering prices
2) It would show consumers that there are alternatives
3) It would mean the consumer could actually see the prices of what they are buying
4) It would allow the customer to not pay a MS tax on any computer model they wished to buy
5) It would help equalize the disparity between the OEM and aftermarket price of MS-Windows
6) Businesses would not be forced to buy licenses twice when they choose to have a corporate license structure with reimaging on installation.
And even all this would only address the OS Monopoly, not the control MS has over other segments of the industry.
While I generally agree with the article, it REALLY depends on what non-SLR camera you are comparing to. For example, if I address his 10 points compared to a high-end Sony 828 non-SLR digital camera:
1) Creative Control: I have most of the same settings and control in the 828 as a DSLR: shutter speed, aperature, white balance, flash modes, color balance, histogram, etc.
2) Superior Sensors: The 828's is nice, but it can't compare to most DSLR's... but that doesn't mean newer non-DSLR's will remain behind the sensor technology curve.
3) Less Noise: Not a terrible problem on the 828
4) Accessories Galore: Yep- gotta hand that over to the SLR's. The 828 can use various flashes, memory, filters, but the lens is fixed.
5) No Shutter Lag: I find the "lag" on the 828 to be minimal. The DSLR's are faster at focusing, but from the time it is focused I see no difference in speed from pressing the button fully down and it taking the picture on the 828 vs. the DSLR's I have used.
6) Instant Startup: Again, what is he comparing to? The 828 is ready to shoot in under one second.
7) Higher Build Quality: 828 will stack up against most DSLR's
8) Viewfinder: Personally, I *like* using a live screen to shoot instead of a viewfinder. So I find the 828 superior to a DSLR in that case, but if you do WANT to use the viewfinder, the DSLR is better. This is probably the most important differentiating factor between the two.
9) Ergonomics: 828 is every bit as comfortable to me as a DSLR, plus it can shoot overhead or underfoot while watching the screen, something you cannot do with a DSLR at all.
10) Price: quality DSLR or non-DSLR, price is similar and not a factor anymore.
Interestingly, a company could easily make a quality non-DSLR camera with a larger sensor and interchangable lenses and most of what is left of the differences will just disappear. Then the consumer is left with the only REAL difference: Do you want to be forced to look through a viewfinder or want to primarily look at a screen? They each have advantages and disadvantages.
And features that the 828 has that I have not seen on the several DSLR's I have played with?
1) The 828 has a (visible) laser focus system for dim light that is extremely accurate.
2) The 828 has a sharper and closer macro mode than any DSLR-included lens I have seen.
3) As mentioned above, the 828 body can twist and allow the photographer to take pictures overhead and underfoot while still seeing what he is doing
4) The 828 has night modes (infrared) that are better than what DSLR's can typically emulate (although I don't find that feature to be all that useful- it is still noisy and, of course, black-and-white-only.)
5) The 828 has full-motion video recording at 640x480, none of the DSLR's I have seen support any type of movie recording.
With the non-free version of Mandriva, NVidia is always setup automatically and works out of the box with no effort. I believe that is also true of the non-free SuSe. The problem is that free distros (Free Mandriva, *buntu, Fedora, Debian, etc) can't do that, because the redistribution is not allowed that way by NVidia (unless I am wrong on that, and someone would care to elaborate). However... it is entirely possible that free distros can arrange a "click on this" and it is downloaded on the fly and configured correctly. And, to point out an error in the article... Yes, Mandriva 2007 will also set up and use AIGLX, BUT NOT FOR NVIDIA CARDS, because the stable driver does not support all the necessary AIGLX extentions necessary to fully run compiz. The beta version on the website does, but I have yet to get it to install cleanly and work with compiz... it is just a little too soon to expect it all to "just work" with compiz.
>Well, so then it's not a "free PC", it's a "free internet access terminal".
OK, then define "PC".
That thing they are showing is a Personal Computer, in every way... only without a hard drive (it uses solid-state storage). And, it is also X86, making it at least mostly IBM-PC compatible.
> I doubt anyone's going to be running half-life or photoshop on that thing.
Neither is available for Linux, so that is moot. However, you could probably run many smaller games, and GIMP. The main obsticle with that type of machine is the lack of a hard drive... but they are probably going to have the user store most stuff (Email/pics/etc) on the server back at the ISP. In any case, it is probably just fitted to be an internet appliance... browser, IM, VOIP, Email, minimal desktop, minimal office applications, and a few games.... that would meet the needs of probably 75%+ of the population.
Even if such a thing could be done, it would probably be the WORST of both HD technologies. Perhaps a single layer of each? A single layer of Blueray is not enough for later. A single layer of HD-DVD is not enough for later. Then you get a damn "flippy disc", so there is no cool label, no side you can safely sit the disc on while moving them around, and no light protection if you forget and leave it on the desk and the sun shines on it for a while.
On top of that you have to pile the licensing fees for all three on top of the cost of the disc. And I have a feeling such a disc would be unreliable, at best.... playing in some devices and not others.
What is needed is a affordable, DUAL FORMAT HD PLAYER, not disc. Then the consumer can then "not care" what media they end up. In an ideal world, all blueray AND HD-DVD discs would both have DVD layers (on the same media side as the HD), so the consumer can also play the movie on the billions of existing devices out there, many that they already own.
Oh well... dream on...
I second that emotion. Icewm is really nice. Stable, fast, configurable, flexible, simple, small.
A better comparison would be Kubuntu, not Ubuntu. Talk about silly though, the two projects (K/non K unbuntu) SHOULD have been merged together. It is just silly to have to do a separate install, just because you want a nice KDE environment or Gnome environment. Mandriva addresses that MUCH better (and always has... and long before any other distro did with as much elegance).
In any case, you are correct that Mandriva faces stiff competition from not only Kubuntu, but also SuSe and Fedora. They all have their advantages and disadvantages. We all like choice, but it does make you wonder just how far a Linux distro could go if all the energy from the dozens of distros went in to just a few.
In any case, to address your "two good releases in a row", that is exactly why Mandriva has moved to a yearly major update process instead of the older two or three times a year. There is good and bad in that, too. But I understand their logic.
I have played with the 3D stuff, and it is quite impressive. But it is also not very stable yet (at all). Plus, KDE's kwin doesn't "do" 3D yet, so you have to use an alien window manager, causing other issues.
Unfortunatly, I think it will be another year before the 3D desktop option will really be ready for general use.
Actually the Club version of Mandriva will automatically detect and use the proprietary drivers for both ATI and NVidia. That is in addition to Acrobat Reader, Flash, etc.
As much as I love MythTV, it will never meet my needs because it cannot and will not be compatible with any premium HDTV content. If all I cared about was crappy local network HD, then it would be OK. But I am far more interested in Discovery HD Theatre, HDNet, ParamountHD, etc... the only way to get those (and others) is through satelite or digial cable... neither of which is going to work with MythTV. Soon, DirecTV will offer *hundreds* of HDTV channels.
So I am still "stuck" with an HD TiVo + DirecTV. It is sad, too.... I thought the whole point of cablecard was going to be to allow third party hardware and software to operate seamlessly on proprietary and protected video networks. But I don't see that happening.
>Even if he cold prove his sobriety at the time,
That is the problem. We will have to start defending ourselves all the time based on data collected "against" us. The burden of proof is shifting slowly from "innocent until proven guilty" to "guilty until proven innocent". Worse, it is immpossible to "defend" oneself from conclusions being made about us by agencies and businesses profiling us based on all kinds of data... of which they have more and more each year.
>Because the stupidity of some people really bugs me, so I have to tell them.
You would do better to hold your "tounge". Just because you don't understand something someone is saying, or you disagree with them, doesn't make them "stupid"... it just makes you arrogant when you call them "stupid".
>You can do that without any tags as well: just look at the house in front of which the bin is placed
If there is an automated system for gathering such information, it is highly unlikely that a machine can do that with any success, speed, or accuracy.
>A neighbour could as well have dropped his garbage in your bin and vice versa. [...]
Nobody said this was infallible. There are lots of ways that errors can creep into such a system, which is all the more scary.
>All I want to say is that this is pure paranoia
One of my favourite quotes I have seen somewhere: "It is only paranoia if they aren't watching you".
>Well, they can already scan your garbage for tags now, this doesn't require a tag on the bin itself!.
>Sorry, but how stupid are you?
Why must people like you resort to name calling? You do realize it makes you sound so juvenile.
"They" would need some type of ID on the trash can to use to associate the bin with a person/residence. Some RFID tags do have product information and do not require a transaction database in order to determine what it is. Then the two pieces of data- owner and product, could be associated.
You are a VERY trusting chap, aren't you? You can't possibly see how or why that same scanner could be used to quickly record every RFID in the bin. Isn't it "worthwhile" to be at least a little concerned about the possible abuses, as the number of items with RFID chips increases each year?
>Would you react the same way if they just write your name on your wheelie bin? I don't really see the difference.
Oh, I see a BIG difference. If they have a scanner on the trucks that can read RFID, they can read not only the tag on the bin, but also all the tags on the trash IN the bin. And it can happen VERY quickly. Furthermore, the huge majority of people won't know they were doing it, or what dangers that implies.
I think you are missing the point. We all know the obvious reasons they are doing it- and they are good reasons: preventing violations of trash rules, perhaps using it to charge people less that produce less waste, preventing people from stealing other's trashcans.
The problem is what it COULD be used for, which has nothing to do with the chap emptying the can. Imagine what a covert agency could discover about you or your family by instantly knowing and tracking future RFID tags! Based on staticical probabilites: how many people live with you, your sexual orientation, your sexual patterns, if you drink alcohol, aspects of how you raise your children, if you smoke, what kinds of high-risk foods you consume, if anything you buy "looks" like you are a terrorist and puts you under further (more intense) observation, medical conditions you might have, if the profile of your consumptions looks like you are using some kind of illegal drug, etc.
Of course, it is much EASIER to do that on the front-end, when you are buying the stuff. Since most people use trackable payment methods. But this is just another possible way to capture such information, even if you regularly pay cash.
The majority of people will claim "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about". But that is not what privacy and freedom are about. Knowledge is power. The more a government spys on and knows about its citizens, the more freedom COULD be taken away from you. The higher the probability mistakes would be made. The more you are forced into a stereotype box that you can't control and without your awareness or consent. The more the "improper" laws could be enforced.
I will give you an example. Most people would agree that speed limits are necessary to ensure public safety (I do too). But most people would NOT agree that means the government can install a device in your car that monitors your driving and auto-issues you a ticket if you go 1 MPH over the limit, and remembers this data for the rest of your life. Soon, it would then creep into limits on how hard you can accelerate. Or perhaps assume you are a bad driver if you had to break really hard. You will find yourself having to defend yourself against all kinds of data being gathered. People 50 years ago would have laughed at that, thinking it was impossible. It is certainly possible today. And tomorrow, perhaps it will be possible to use facial recognition everywhere, covertly, and track and record your every movement.
Technology is wonderful- it enables tremendous improvements in all aspects of life. But with it, there is a huge danger of abuse. The majority of people don't understand today's technology or how it COULD be used against them. And each year it gets a little more complex. Let's all hope there are enough people that understand how dangerous technology can be and help to educate those who don't understand. It is not about paranoia, it is about being a responsible person who wants to ensure that there are checks and balances on what information overt and covert government agencies (and businesses too) can collect and what they can do with it.