However, when Linux has come installed on PCs, users have tended to avoid them or return them. Remember the early netbooks shipped with Linux. They had a huge return rate, and it wasn't long till manufacturers withdrew then and replaced then with Windows based netbooks.
And don't lump ESR and RMS together - RMS is driven by principle, ESR is driven by pragmatism. RMS believes it's better to use bad software than non-free software. ESR believes open source leads to processes that produce high quality software.
Interesting. I'd say experience shows that open source works well for software with only technical requirements. Command line tools. Compilers. OS kernels. Implementations of documented protocols. File format converters. That sort of thing.
Open source tends to fail to produce high quality where there are subjective choices to be made. UIs. Apps. Partly because programmers make design choices which they are unqualified to make, and partly because the lack of organisation means that there's no house style and no common overarching conventions. And to some extent there's an arrogant rejection of the needs of anyone who's not as expert in the topic as the programmer himself.
You say RMS prefers free to good. Personally I'll take good over free any day.
Morally bankrupt? It's a fucking OS. Get a grip. There's ideology, then there's zealotry. When you start talking about morals in the choice of as mundane a product as an OS, you've crossed the line into zealotry.
No one has ever proven or even credibly suggested that Windows or OSX is easier to use than Linux, especially Android.
Every single day they do. Including the other person answering your post. And he's a Linux user.
If you can seriously sit there and tell me that Windows makes servers easier to use in the way that admins use servers, you know fuck-all about anything.
There are plenty of admins (possibly most) that think Windows server is easier to use than Linux. There are probably more servers out there running Linux, because of the massive data centres that choose Linux because of the free-as-in-beer advantage. But admins? There's probably more Windows admins.
Just because I have a different perspective, and or point of view, does not mean I "know fuck-all about anything". I'm afraid you begin to sound like a zealot at that stage.
Who are you quoting there with "alien race bent on the destruction of humanity"? Because the post you replied to wasn't talking about that. It was talking about the concept of them being inspired by the Nazis specifically.
I'd expect them to choose it based on the benefits of the ideology.
Where there are benefits, they do. Chiefly the benefit of being free as in beer. That's why it's been used for embedded devices such as routers and phones. But that's manufacturers making the choice.
On the desktop there's consumer choice. And for most consumers free as in beer is less useful to them than ease of use and compatibility.
On servers, free as in beer has turned out to be more important than ease of use, because computer operators can be expected to learn the accidental complexity.
Thanks for the pointer to Eric S Raymond. I only knew of his from The Cathedral and the Bazaar. I had no idea he was a right wing nut, global warming and HIV denier, Bush jr supporter, islamophobic war-monger, homophobic, racist troll.
I use Linux because I feel it is the best Free and Open environment.
Ideologies always have a few extremist supporters. And in this case most of them congregate around slashdot. Most people wouldn't choose an OS for an ideology though.
And as long as it's about an ideology, rather than being a good user experience, Linux will continue to fail on the desktop.
The only reason it's found success in other markets (phones, servers, embedded systems) is because of the meaning of free that's not ideology - free as in beer.
The physical design was great. But the concept of the Daleks, the Nazi theme, that they were mechanical things that glided across the floor etc was Terry Nation.
Cusick was the designer. Terry Nation was definitely the creator.
The War of the Worlds didn't take any inspiration from the Nazis, given that H G Wells wrote it in the 1800s.
You may be thinking of the 1950s movie version. That did have changes from the book, including moving it from Victorian England to contemporary America, but AFAIR it didn't add anything Nazi like that wasn't already in the book.
It's the same word repeated twice.
You mean tautology. Like for example: "repeated twice".
Of course there was propaganda during the war, and lots of censorship. On the other hand not only were there newspaper photos, the British were making action movies about the war during the war. It's unlikely that none of them contained a panzer. As you say it would doubtless be blown up, but that would involve seeing it first.
But the Daleks first appeared in 1963, 18 years after the end of the war. Pretty much everyone will have been very familiar with what panzers looked like by that time, again because of the vast number of action war films.
I'd never really thought about it before but I buy the idea that elements of the design were taken from tanks. The rotating lid, with the projecting eye stalk is very tank like. And the gun and plunger universal joint is absolutely like the one on machine guns on tanks.
Whether or not that helped to make the Daleks scary, I don't know. They certainly terrified me as a child, but it was more the inhumanness, the seeming invincibility, the likelyhood of instant death upon seeing one, and the voice I think. With the exception of the voice, they were scary in much the same way Alien is scary.
I love the design of the Daleks as a classic. But I think their scariness had more to do with Terry Nation's writing. The Daleks, including their Nazi basis, were his idea, as written in the script, before the physical design of the Daleks was thought up. "Exterminate", the supreme race etc. were his ideas.
If one of them had stepped up without this proof they would now be the the premier Android provider with a leg ahead on 70% of the global smartphone market.
That's basically what Samsung has anyway. They're virtually the only successful Android manufacturer. The only ones making decent money out of it other than Apple. Many tried, most failed.
My whole life the world has been ad driven. Saturday morning cartoons with Underdog and Superchicken on a black and white TV, late nite "Our Gang" interspersed with ads for cereal we demanded our parents deliver if they truly loved us and wanted us to be well... and so on.
Ah bad luck. Our best TV channels are run by the BBC. No advertising. Shows and feature films with no commercial breaks. Nice.
That's true. Because even in the worst spots in Europe you don't fear that you're going to get shot. I mean shootings do happen in Europe. But they're not common enough even in the worst places to fear it's going to happen to you.
I like to joke about what I'd do if I was "Evil Overlord of the USA, because president isn't enough power". One of the steps(the whole plan would be a small book) involves running my Legions of Terror through the ghettos to clean them up.
We all have moments of "If I ruled the world". Putting guns aside for the moment, I take note that the strongest indicator of both crime, and measurements of happiness in a country is the social inequality. (Measured by the Gini Coefficient.)
Running your "Legions of Terror" through the ghettos will only result in making the country more like Brazil or Columbia. Terrorising the poor doesn't help anyone. If you want to lower crime and make people happier, then you do things to reduce the gap between rich and poor. And if you're wise, you don't do it chiefly by tax and welfare. You make sure that workers get more of the money that companies earn, starting with the lowest paid employees. And you eradicate needless unemployment by having the government hire the people that can't otherwise find work. There's always some public good that those people could be working on. Even if it's picking up garbage, or constructing public amenities.
Slashdot Mirror
Not when there's 1.3 million Chinese.
Spot on!
It's not meant to test bribery. It's meant to test a sense of fairness.
And you didn't read very far. There were other sorts of test. Like visual perception tests.
However, when Linux has come installed on PCs, users have tended to avoid them or return them. Remember the early netbooks shipped with Linux. They had a huge return rate, and it wasn't long till manufacturers withdrew then and replaced then with Windows based netbooks.
And don't lump ESR and RMS together - RMS is driven by principle, ESR is driven by pragmatism. RMS believes it's better to use bad software than non-free software. ESR believes open source leads to processes that produce high quality software.
Interesting. I'd say experience shows that open source works well for software with only technical requirements. Command line tools. Compilers. OS kernels. Implementations of documented protocols. File format converters. That sort of thing.
Open source tends to fail to produce high quality where there are subjective choices to be made. UIs. Apps. Partly because programmers make design choices which they are unqualified to make, and partly because the lack of organisation means that there's no house style and no common overarching conventions. And to some extent there's an arrogant rejection of the needs of anyone who's not as expert in the topic as the programmer himself.
You say RMS prefers free to good. Personally I'll take good over free any day.
How many years experience do you have of Windows admin?
Congratulations, you failed to read the second sentence of a two sentence post. That's lame, even for Slashdot.
Morally bankrupt? It's a fucking OS. Get a grip. There's ideology, then there's zealotry. When you start talking about morals in the choice of as mundane a product as an OS, you've crossed the line into zealotry.
No one has ever proven or even credibly suggested that Windows or OSX is easier to use than Linux, especially Android.
Every single day they do. Including the other person answering your post. And he's a Linux user.
If you can seriously sit there and tell me that Windows makes servers easier to use in the way that admins use servers, you know fuck-all about anything.
There are plenty of admins (possibly most) that think Windows server is easier to use than Linux. There are probably more servers out there running Linux, because of the massive data centres that choose Linux because of the free-as-in-beer advantage. But admins? There's probably more Windows admins.
Just because I have a different perspective, and or point of view, does not mean I "know fuck-all about anything". I'm afraid you begin to sound like a zealot at that stage.
Who are you quoting there with "alien race bent on the destruction of humanity"? Because the post you replied to wasn't talking about that. It was talking about the concept of them being inspired by the Nazis specifically.
I'd expect them to choose it based on the benefits of the ideology.
Where there are benefits, they do. Chiefly the benefit of being free as in beer. That's why it's been used for embedded devices such as routers and phones. But that's manufacturers making the choice.
On the desktop there's consumer choice. And for most consumers free as in beer is less useful to them than ease of use and compatibility.
On servers, free as in beer has turned out to be more important than ease of use, because computer operators can be expected to learn the accidental complexity.
Thanks for the pointer to Eric S Raymond. I only knew of his from The Cathedral and the Bazaar. I had no idea he was a right wing nut, global warming and HIV denier, Bush jr supporter, islamophobic war-monger, homophobic, racist troll.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond
Him and Stallman, what a pair! By comparison Torvalds looks quite tame and reasonable.
Given that Linux is running on everything from my phone to my sat-nav
Anyone know what OS is on Garmin Nuvi GPSs ? Because it's the only device I have that crashes frequently.
I use Linux because I feel it is the best Free and Open environment.
Ideologies always have a few extremist supporters. And in this case most of them congregate around slashdot. Most people wouldn't choose an OS for an ideology though.
And as long as it's about an ideology, rather than being a good user experience, Linux will continue to fail on the desktop.
The only reason it's found success in other markets (phones, servers, embedded systems) is because of the meaning of free that's not ideology - free as in beer.
The physical design was great. But the concept of the Daleks, the Nazi theme, that they were mechanical things that glided across the floor etc was Terry Nation.
Cusick was the designer. Terry Nation was definitely the creator.
The War of the Worlds didn't take any inspiration from the Nazis, given that H G Wells wrote it in the 1800s.
You may be thinking of the 1950s movie version. That did have changes from the book, including moving it from Victorian England to contemporary America, but AFAIR it didn't add anything Nazi like that wasn't already in the book.
It's the same word repeated twice.
You mean tautology. Like for example: "repeated twice".
This is a quite bizarre argument.
Of course there was propaganda during the war, and lots of censorship. On the other hand not only were there newspaper photos, the British were making action movies about the war during the war. It's unlikely that none of them contained a panzer. As you say it would doubtless be blown up, but that would involve seeing it first.
But the Daleks first appeared in 1963, 18 years after the end of the war. Pretty much everyone will have been very familiar with what panzers looked like by that time, again because of the vast number of action war films.
I'd never really thought about it before but I buy the idea that elements of the design were taken from tanks. The rotating lid, with the projecting eye stalk is very tank like. And the gun and plunger universal joint is absolutely like the one on machine guns on tanks.
Whether or not that helped to make the Daleks scary, I don't know. They certainly terrified me as a child, but it was more the inhumanness, the seeming invincibility, the likelyhood of instant death upon seeing one, and the voice I think. With the exception of the voice, they were scary in much the same way Alien is scary.
I love the design of the Daleks as a classic. But I think their scariness had more to do with Terry Nation's writing. The Daleks, including their Nazi basis, were his idea, as written in the script, before the physical design of the Daleks was thought up. "Exterminate", the supreme race etc. were his ideas.
If one of them had stepped up without this proof they would now be the the premier Android provider with a leg ahead on 70% of the global smartphone market.
That's basically what Samsung has anyway. They're virtually the only successful Android manufacturer. The only ones making decent money out of it other than Apple. Many tried, most failed.
My whole life the world has been ad driven. Saturday morning cartoons with Underdog and Superchicken on a black and white TV, late nite "Our Gang" interspersed with ads for cereal we demanded our parents deliver if they truly loved us and wanted us to be well... and so on.
Ah bad luck. Our best TV channels are run by the BBC. No advertising. Shows and feature films with no commercial breaks. Nice.
It's exactly the same. With no judicial process, it's 'whatever we happen to feel like punishing people for today'...
The thing with pro gun types - they know disarming law abiding citizens makes them less safe, not more.
It makes them 4 times less likely to be murdered.
The concept of ownership of ideas is inherently immoral and a disgrace to the human intellect.
The refrain of someone who has never has any worthwhile ideas.
The last 3 months? I remember we were calling for this 10 years ago.
They're like cheerleaders, but actually doing something useful!
At your worst, your bad spots aren't that bad.
That's true. Because even in the worst spots in Europe you don't fear that you're going to get shot. I mean shootings do happen in Europe. But they're not common enough even in the worst places to fear it's going to happen to you.
I like to joke about what I'd do if I was "Evil Overlord of the USA, because president isn't enough power". One of the steps(the whole plan would be a small book) involves running my Legions of Terror through the ghettos to clean them up.
We all have moments of "If I ruled the world". Putting guns aside for the moment, I take note that the strongest indicator of both crime, and measurements of happiness in a country is the social inequality. (Measured by the Gini Coefficient.)
Running your "Legions of Terror" through the ghettos will only result in making the country more like Brazil or Columbia. Terrorising the poor doesn't help anyone. If you want to lower crime and make people happier, then you do things to reduce the gap between rich and poor. And if you're wise, you don't do it chiefly by tax and welfare. You make sure that workers get more of the money that companies earn, starting with the lowest paid employees. And you eradicate needless unemployment by having the government hire the people that can't otherwise find work. There's always some public good that those people could be working on. Even if it's picking up garbage, or constructing public amenities.