I'm running Gentoo, kernel 2.6.3, with reiserfs as the root partition, and I didn't have any problems at all. The config used is just a 2.6.2 config which was actually just a 2.6.1 config which was just a 2.6.0-test11 config, etc. I'd suggest checking the fstab to make sure that that is sill pointing the the correct partition and that kind of stuff - you shouldn't need any customizations in order to mount a reiserfs partition.
Get your facts right. A virus scanner has nothing to do with security exploits. It does nothing to address them - you're thinking of a trojan, or perhaps a worm.
Well, I have an nVidia card and as such am unable to directly refute what you said, but it is my knowledge that the XFree-DRI and DRM provide 3D acceleration pretty well with the Radeon cards. If they break X for you, thats a bug, not because 3D Acceleration doesn't work for ATI cards. I know that the situation is rather good, at least for folks with NVidia cards - you don't need to have any skill whatsoever to run their installer. Most hardware Just Works(tm) under Linux, I don't see hardware drivers as the largest problem anywhere. That said, yes, we need more.
The fundamental problem with that method is that you have to have the file in order to upload it to others. Most users will not have all the files on the site in a predictable location.
Well, that may be so, but when I used to use XP, I can remember it occasionally happening. He's not stating that its a showstopper, just that it can be a problem at times.
Well, in regards to your Music Artists analogies, I believe the general consensus on Slashdot is not that they do not deserve money for their work, just that downloading the music on P2P is not hurting artists. Firstly, there's the old argument of those who wouldn't buy it anyway, and are thus not hurting anybody. However, consider this: For those who really like a certain band who happens to be signed under the RIAA, which option is more attractive?
#1. Buy CD from the store. Cost, $20. The artist will get around 20c I believe. Then, the disc will not be able to be ripped or played on a computer without a struggle.
#2. Download the songs of the album off a P2P network. Mail the artist $5. Cost, $5.34. One is then free to do whatever you want with the music.
I know this diverged a bit from the topic, but I really don't think most/.'ers are against artists making money off their music. Just that they see the records labels as making that an inviable choice.
The good thing about this is that it lets anyone who wanted OEM hardware, with support, for a reasonable price, that oppurtunity. Anyone who wants will just format the drive and put Linux on there.
Although the Prescott core will have a longer pipeline, it will proboably end up performing a bit better clock-per-clock against Northwood. This is due to a couple reasons. Firsly, Prescoot has 1 MB on-die L2 cache. That's a good bit, and one could see how the P4 was helped by the 2M L3 cache in the P4 "EE". Secondly, the new P4 will have improved hyperthreading. It will also have somewhat improved branch prediction and implements PNI(Prescott New Instruction) which will require a recompile to help things out. All in all, I see the Prescott as being just as fast or faster per clock as Northwood, mostly due to the doubled L2 cache.
I honestly don't see this a too big of a problem rigt now. One can have fun just playing Linux-native games like Quake 3 and UT2k3, or, if you have Wine/WineX, you can play CS, Enemy Territory, RTCW, Call of Duty, Max Payne, and a bunch of otehr games. Most windows games Just Work under Wine. This area is important to desktop growth, though, because gamers are generally the type of people who would consider switching to Linux, but feel held back by the inability to play their favorite game.
I'd have to disagree. I'm running the KDE 3.2 and the 2.6 kernel quite well as a desktop system currently. Anything I can do in Windows, I can do in Linux. I can open up MS Office docs, read web sites, chat with friends over AIM, and, most importantly, play a good number of games. I play CS, Enemy Territory, GTA3, Max Payne, Call of Duty, WarCraft III...every game I played when I ran Windows, works on Linux. I'm using Gentoo, but a beginner could figure out how to do all this using Mandrake; the installation and setup are just as easy as on Windows. And it's not as though I have a huge amount of experience in this area: I'm 16, and have used Linux for under a year. What makes me think that Linux will continue to make strides in the desktop market is that several of my friends use it as their desktop OS, and many more have expressed intrest in trying it. In conclusion, I believe that although more work needs to be done, the Linux desktop is currently at least as good as that of Windows.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was told the PR xxxx+ was in comparison of what a Athlon Thunderbird clock speed would be.
That is always AMD's official explanation of their naming scheme, but it seems much more likely to be viewed as a direct comparison with Intel's processor. AMD knows that in order to do well on the desktop, it has to sound as though it is as fast or faster that Intel's offerings. This naming scheme allows AMD to tell possible consumers how it should perform in relation to it's Intel counterpart.
Intel is already talking 150 watts for processors to be released this year.
Initially people thought this was the case, but it seems to be clear as of late that Intel's Prescott will use about as much power clock for clock as Northwood, due to the smaller procwss used (90nm).
It is quite likely that the PowerPC line is going to pass Intel in the next 8 to 12 months.
Regardless of what you think about Intel's products, they have a good sized market share, which is not the kind of thing that will change within a year. Customers want high clockspeeds, regardless of performance, and vendors are only happy to oblige. However, even if the everyone in the market all decided simultaneosly that they should switch to a different architecture, that would not be enough to put PPC in front of Intel within a year; All the applications would have to be recompiled and such. Or perhaps I misinterpreted what you said. In my opinion, Intel will remain the company with the largest CPU market share for at least three more years. Their most dangerous competitor is AMD, because the CPU's of each run the same code.
The reference to "more bang for your buck" was not in reference to that article, but in several other articles of theirs in which they consistenly conclude that for the midrange, one is better off with AMD.
As for their article upon the Athlon 64 launch (yes, the one you linked), although they conclude that the P4 EE was the best, anyone who would be reading said benchmarks would know that the P4 EE isn't a "real", consumer chip; it still can't be had under $1k. If one views their benchmarks not as Athlon 64 vc P4 EE but versus the general P4C chips, they demonstrate a quite strong showing for AMD; In my opinion, it does not appear indicative of true bias or corporate funding.
Given the history of THG and their decidedly negative (some might say Intel-funded) view of the Athlon 64 chips
Have you even read the benchmarks THG between the P4 and the Athlon XP 64/64 FX they did after it was released? They show how well the Athlon 64 chips do against the higher-clocked P4's, and consistenly recommend AMD's as more bang for your buck. But no, you heard from someome on/. that THG is biased against AMD, so it must be such.
KDE is great, but too much is exposed. I don't need three text editors in a right click menu, I want one that just works, although I generally use vi and they never include that in the click menus:(
I know this is comment was in jest, but you can set KDE to open them up with vi by just adding vi to the mime/file association type and having it open in console.
That's why this was meant to extend X, not replace it. I agree that we shouldn't kill X just yet; Video Card manufacturers and the like need to see Linux unified if they're going to put the time into developing Linux drivers.
As long as this at least is able to emulate X11, I don't see the problem with it, as if you didn't use its additional features, you wouldn't notice a difference, while enabling those who needed them to have some powerful features.
By the way, I agree copy-paste in X applications is currently quite broken, through no fault of XFree.
This was humourous, but really, I don't see the problem with the large-scale use of anti-aliasing and such to make the desktop prettier. Yes, it is unnecessary, but people like to have a cool looking desktop. Having anti-aliased fonts and a 3D accelerated desktop won't hurt performance, except on low-end machines, in which case it can be disabled. Almost all of this is done on the Video Card, so folks won't see a performance loss just doing browsing and such. And the desktop isn't rendered when you're playing games, so that's not a problem. -Neil
You don't think that Mac and Linux are less of a target? If 90% of the world uses something, regardless of it's inherent security, it will be attacked more. You disagree with that?
Another important reason that Windows systems are more often compromised is the general skill of the user base: Linux and Mac users tend to be more skilled at security then Windows users-not an absolute, just a trend.
Windows comes with 5 ports open...
Ok? What's the problem? If you don't want those services running...stop them! It's not a problem, just something in the default install you don't like.
Your next point, about software installation, is basically complaining that most Windows users log on as Administrator, or root. Again, if you are worried about this, DO NOT RUN THINGS AS ADMIN! Not a problem.
About protected OS files: Many people WANT to screw around with the OS. I don't see you complaining about Linux users being able to mess with OS files. Also, if someone roots your box, and can delete all your data files, what good, really, does having the OS still there do? You can just reinstall it, while you cannot get back your data.
Also, Outlook is not windows. I'm fairly sure that one can change some Outlook settings to make it not automatically run scripts. If not, nothing prevents you from, say, using Mozilla Mail.
Slashdot Mirror
I similarly run gentoo, and I do not have to tack those on the kernel command line. Perhaps that is only if you include initrd support in the .config?
I'm running Gentoo, kernel 2.6.3, with reiserfs as the root partition, and I didn't have any problems at all. The config used is just a 2.6.2 config which was actually just a 2.6.1 config which was just a 2.6.0-test11 config, etc. I'd suggest checking the fstab to make sure that that is sill pointing the the correct partition and that kind of stuff - you shouldn't need any customizations in order to mount a reiserfs partition.
Get your facts right. A virus scanner has nothing to do with security exploits. It does nothing to address them - you're thinking of a trojan, or perhaps a worm.
Well, I have an nVidia card and as such am unable to directly refute what you said, but it is my knowledge that the XFree-DRI and DRM provide 3D acceleration pretty well with the Radeon cards. If they break X for you, thats a bug, not because 3D Acceleration doesn't work for ATI cards. I know that the situation is rather good, at least for folks with NVidia cards - you don't need to have any skill whatsoever to run their installer. Most hardware Just Works(tm) under Linux, I don't see hardware drivers as the largest problem anywhere. That said, yes, we need more.
The fundamental problem with that method is that you have to have the file in order to upload it to others. Most users will not have all the files on the site in a predictable location.
Well, that may be so, but when I used to use XP, I can remember it occasionally happening. He's not stating that its a showstopper, just that it can be a problem at times.
Well, in regards to your Music Artists analogies, I believe the general consensus on Slashdot is not that they do not deserve money for their work, just that downloading the music on P2P is not hurting artists. Firstly, there's the old argument of those who wouldn't buy it anyway, and are thus not hurting anybody. However, consider this: For those who really like a certain band who happens to be signed under the RIAA, which option is more attractive?
/.'ers are against artists making money off their music. Just that they see the records labels as making that an inviable choice.
#1. Buy CD from the store. Cost, $20. The artist will get around 20c I believe. Then, the disc will not be able to be ripped or played on a computer without a struggle.
#2. Download the songs of the album off a P2P network. Mail the artist $5. Cost, $5.34. One is then free to do whatever you want with the music.
I know this diverged a bit from the topic, but I really don't think most
The good thing about this is that it lets anyone who wanted OEM hardware, with support, for a reasonable price, that oppurtunity. Anyone who wants will just format the drive and put Linux on there.
Well, if that were the case, after the first kick there would be nobody left. In summary, I agree that yes, it would improve the quality of IRC.
Although the Prescott core will have a longer pipeline, it will proboably end up performing a bit better clock-per-clock against Northwood. This is due to a couple reasons. Firsly, Prescoot has 1 MB on-die L2 cache. That's a good bit, and one could see how the P4 was helped by the 2M L3 cache in the P4 "EE". Secondly, the new P4 will have improved hyperthreading. It will also have somewhat improved branch prediction and implements PNI(Prescott New Instruction) which will require a recompile to help things out. All in all, I see the Prescott as being just as fast or faster per clock as Northwood, mostly due to the doubled L2 cache.
I honestly don't see this a too big of a problem rigt now. One can have fun just playing Linux-native games like Quake 3 and UT2k3, or, if you have Wine/WineX, you can play CS, Enemy Territory, RTCW, Call of Duty, Max Payne, and a bunch of otehr games. Most windows games Just Work under Wine. This area is important to desktop growth, though, because gamers are generally the type of people who would consider switching to Linux, but feel held back by the inability to play their favorite game.
I'd have to disagree. I'm running the KDE 3.2 and the 2.6 kernel quite well as a desktop system currently. Anything I can do in Windows, I can do in Linux. I can open up MS Office docs, read web sites, chat with friends over AIM, and, most importantly, play a good number of games. I play CS, Enemy Territory, GTA3, Max Payne, Call of Duty, WarCraft III...every game I played when I ran Windows, works on Linux. I'm using Gentoo, but a beginner could figure out how to do all this using Mandrake; the installation and setup are just as easy as on Windows. And it's not as though I have a huge amount of experience in this area: I'm 16, and have used Linux for under a year. What makes me think that Linux will continue to make strides in the desktop market is that several of my friends use it as their desktop OS, and many more have expressed intrest in trying it. In conclusion, I believe that although more work needs to be done, the Linux desktop is currently at least as good as that of Windows.
Hehe, you think that's bad? Debian corrupted the partition table on my hard drive. Needless to say, I'm running Gentoo now.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was told the PR xxxx+ was in comparison of what a Athlon Thunderbird clock speed would be.
That is always AMD's official explanation of their naming scheme, but it seems much more likely to be viewed as a direct comparison with Intel's processor. AMD knows that in order to do well on the desktop, it has to sound as though it is as fast or faster that Intel's offerings. This naming scheme allows AMD to tell possible consumers how it should perform in relation to it's Intel counterpart.
Intel is already talking 150 watts for processors to be released this year.
Initially people thought this was the case, but it seems to be clear as of late that Intel's Prescott will use about as much power clock for clock as Northwood, due to the smaller procwss used (90nm).
It is quite likely that the PowerPC line is going to pass Intel in the next 8 to 12 months.
Regardless of what you think about Intel's products, they have a good sized market share, which is not the kind of thing that will change within a year. Customers want high clockspeeds, regardless of performance, and vendors are only happy to oblige. However, even if the everyone in the market all decided simultaneosly that they should switch to a different architecture, that would not be enough to put PPC in front of Intel within a year; All the applications would have to be recompiled and such. Or perhaps I misinterpreted what you said. In my opinion, Intel will remain the company with the largest CPU market share for at least three more years. Their most dangerous competitor is AMD, because the CPU's of each run the same code.
DD is far slower because it makes exact copies down to the bits. Norton Ghost works by cloning files instead.
I must be missing something huge here. How can you copy files without copying the bits that make them up?
The reference to "more bang for your buck" was not in reference to that article, but in several other articles of theirs in which they consistenly conclude that for the midrange, one is better off with AMD.
As for their article upon the Athlon 64 launch (yes, the one you linked), although they conclude that the P4 EE was the best, anyone who would be reading said benchmarks would know that the P4 EE isn't a "real", consumer chip; it still can't be had under $1k. If one views their benchmarks not as Athlon 64 vc P4 EE but versus the general P4C chips, they demonstrate a quite strong showing for AMD; In my opinion, it does not appear indicative of true bias or corporate funding.
Given the history of THG and their decidedly negative (some might say Intel-funded) view of the Athlon 64 chips
/. that THG is biased against AMD, so it must be such.
Have you even read the benchmarks THG between the P4 and the Athlon XP 64/64 FX they did after it was released? They show how well the Athlon 64 chips do against the higher-clocked P4's, and consistenly recommend AMD's as more bang for your buck. But no, you heard from someome on
KDE is great, but too much is exposed. I don't need three text editors in a right click menu, I want one that just works, although I generally use vi and they never include that in the click menus:(
I know this is comment was in jest, but you can set KDE to open them up with vi by just adding vi to the mime/file association type and having it open in console.
It can also be toggled by echoing a 1 or 0 into
/proc/sys/kernel/sysrq
If only we had their numbers...
That's why this was meant to extend X, not replace it. I agree that we shouldn't kill X just yet; Video Card manufacturers and the like need to see Linux unified if they're going to put the time into developing Linux drivers.
As long as this at least is able to emulate X11, I don't see the problem with it, as if you didn't use its additional features, you wouldn't notice a difference, while enabling those who needed them to have some powerful features.
By the way, I agree copy-paste in X applications is currently quite broken, through no fault of XFree.
This was humourous, but really, I don't see the problem with the large-scale use of anti-aliasing and such to make the desktop prettier. Yes, it is unnecessary, but people like to have a cool looking desktop. Having anti-aliased fonts and a 3D accelerated desktop won't hurt performance, except on low-end machines, in which case it can be disabled. Almost all of this is done on the Video Card, so folks won't see a performance loss just doing browsing and such. And the desktop isn't rendered when you're playing games, so that's not a problem.
-Neil
I agree that the default install of Windows isn't amazingly secure. However, I don't feel that that that represents a fundamental flaw in an OS.
Lets look at your points.
You don't think that Mac and Linux are less of a target? If 90% of the world uses something, regardless of it's inherent security, it will be attacked more. You disagree with that?
Another important reason that Windows systems are more often compromised is the general skill of the user base: Linux and Mac users tend to be more skilled at security then Windows users-not an absolute, just a trend.
Windows comes with 5 ports open...
Ok? What's the problem? If you don't want those services running...stop them! It's not a problem, just something in the default install you don't like.
Your next point, about software installation, is basically complaining that most Windows users log on as Administrator, or root. Again, if you are worried about this, DO NOT RUN THINGS AS ADMIN! Not a problem.
About protected OS files: Many people WANT to screw around with the OS. I don't see you complaining about Linux users being able to mess with OS files. Also, if someone roots your box, and can delete all your data files, what good, really, does having the OS still there do? You can just reinstall it, while you cannot get back your data.
Also, Outlook is not windows. I'm fairly sure that one can change some Outlook settings to make it not automatically run scripts. If not, nothing prevents you from, say, using Mozilla Mail.