I suppose all these off-topic comments are justified because Tony Blair and George Bush have the big glowing cyber-balls to do what needs to be done without having to screw around with france?
Perhaps you posted this on a topic regarding CPU cooling so people would think you are cool? Well you're not, and that's way on topic. But I bet Saddam Hussein could use these units - his processors are gonna be running pretty hot when the napalm starts dropping.
The way I see it, no GUI is really better than any other except in the mind of the user. Not always true, but enough so for my following point. Some people think the Windows GUI is absolutely terrible. I actually like the Windows GUI, and I see it as an honest difference of opinion. Why do I like the Windows GUI? It's not better than any of the Linux GUI's, it's just more familiar to me. I've been using Windows for years, and I'm used to it. I'm sure a good many of you have your own favorite Linux GUI's for the exact same reason. And, like it or not, we work better when using a GUI we're familiar with, so people will usually stick with whatever they are most accustomed to if they have half a choice.
And really, I don't care if it looks like a horse's ass, if it works for you, then use it.
(And yes, I do use Windows XP (regrettably). Don't any of you dare say a word about it, or I'll stuff you in a garbage bag and ship you to M$. I mean it.)
For your car industry analogy, it's more like not being able to use the same gas without refining it yourself. You can't just install your programs on Linux - you have Red Hat versions, and Debian versions, etc.. While this may be ok for slashdot readers, for the masses it just doesn't work. With Windows, you pretty much know that.exe file will run on your machine, and if it doesn't you download it again or take the CDs back to the store and get them replaced.
Linux has several problems. The first is related to what I call the Windows Factor. This is the degree to which it has been dumbed down for the average computer (Windows) user. Linux just hasn't been reduced to their level yet, and trying to get these people working on Linux would be nothing but an exercise in futility. The next thing wrong with Linux is software. I've heard the arguements, open source alternatives blah blah, and while that may be true, I wanna play all the cool new computer games on my PC, and they aren't made for Linux. Another thing Linux lacks is marketing. When people start seeing ads for Linux on CNN maybe they'll start running it.
However, Linux DOES have stability, versatility, and power. Great for servers. I love linux for servers, and wouldn't touch Microsoft software for that purpose. Good for a number of small and large businesses too, if you get them weaned off of Microsoft Office (a task that Microsoft's pricing policies is indeed making easier). Not good for games, which today largely run only on Windows, or Windows and Mac at best, and thus not all that good for most home computing. Maybe when that is addressed, we can really get Linux going somewhere.
Herein lies the problem. Linux has too many GUI's. Hell, Linux has too many distributions. Most people want to pick up something and have it ready to use. They don't want dozens of GUI's and distributions. They just want it to work, and so far Windows has at least part of that down.
At risk to my own skin, I'm going to say that I think people LIKE Windows. As much as most people moan and gripe about it, Windows does one thing very well - you don't have to think to pick up Windows at Wal-Mart. They want to be able to install things without too many problems.
People don't want to have to think, so they buy Windows. Simply put, people are stupid. If you don't believe me try volunteering at a college computer lab. Your faith in human intelligence will be destroyed in about five minutes.
"In news today, Microsoft has brought out the Microsoft Neural Windows Operating Systems. Critics complain that the EULA stipulates that any data, including neural data, is signed over to Microsoft after being uploaded, but the company downplays any possibility of this being used to gain ownership over individuals..."
Perhaps if you were less a student of religion and more a student of history you would realize that Christianity has arguably caused more evil overall than any other organization in history, with the possible exception of Nazi Germany.
Allow me to clarify. The longevity of the Roman empire was brought about by its openness and acceptance of the gods of others. They might not have always believed in them, but they respected them. Naturally they expected their own gods to be respected, and when the Christians told them to go to hell instead. This was, in fact, largely ignored until Nero blamed the burning of Rome on them, and they used it to turn public opinion their way, breed dissent, and bring down the Roman empire.
Or perhaps I should bring mention to the Inquisition. Contrary to what many think, it lasted from around the time Christians got real political power to around the time of the American colonies (remember the Salem witch trials?). They wanted to stamp out any and all other religions, and used whatever means necessary to do so. If you disobeyed, you would be murdered.
Now, add in the Crusades. The men who went didn't go for religious purposes. They went to loot, pillage, and rape, a task they fulfilled with grim efficiency. Well, ok, maybe some went for religious reasons, but not all that many of them were so deluded.
You can question the credibility of some of these claims, but they can each be backed up by historical fact. I will admit Christians weren't the only reason for the decline of rome, but they WERE one of the major factors in Rome's fall, and I challenge you all to provide to provide broad-based, credible proof that states otherwise.
And likewise, I challenge any of you to provide any real credible verifiable undeniable proof of the existance of the Christian god. I doubt it can be done.
If it's illegal for telemarketers to make calls to a cell phone, would it likewise be illegal for them to send e-mails to an address which is checked by a cell phone? Hmm...
Otherwise, let's start giving them our cell phone numbers, and then sue them into submission. C'mon it'll be fun, and our lawyers will love us for it.
Ah you must be the expert on all things sucky then. Our school used to have a C-64, a network of Apples, and some really old sort of PC (I forget what it was). My fondest memory of those long-lost times is of screwing up the entire network of Apples. My second fondest memory is the time I got to spend playing the old games on those old computers. The old games were kinda cool in their own way
And don't knock text-based games. There were some of those that were really cool. I still play them once in a while too..
I could make some enlightened post that dazzles all who read it with its genius, but I won't. Instead I'll quote the character Dick from Shakespeare's Henry VI, part 2.
The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
[I]That sounds like a good way to kill the internet. Who's going to log on if they risk running up a $10,000 bill from some script kiddie who took over their machine?[/I]
People who don't use AOL and open every attachment that comes through their e-mail or instant messenger maybe?
I must be a total geek with what I put in my computer room. For one, it's the same as my bedroom. I bought two sheets of plywood and built a sturdy computer desk and a table for my TV to set beside it, as the conventional desks weren't tall enough for my queen sized bed. That wasn't enough. I built a headboard from plywood with bookshelves and now it's stuffed with computer books. For decorations, I have maps and things from various Dungeons & Dragons supplement (Forgotten Realms and Planescape mostly) and a few maps from national geographic. I have the usual litter of CD's, soda bottles (I drink straight from 2-liter soda bottles - more soda, less trips away from the computer), and various other things that seem to accumulate. But of course the most interesting feature is the cats that wander in every once in a while. They're annoyances but they're nice t have around.
It comes down to economics here. If you filter internet traffic, someone bound to complain about it sooner or later. Like when legitimate messages (such as winning e-bay bids) get classified as spam. I got a nice non-paying bidder complaint out of that because they couldn't get through the filter. So ISP's on the receiving end are in a lose/lose situation here.
What we really need is a federal law requiring that the originator of malicious internet traffic, or perhaps excessive unrequested internet traffic, pay any fees associated with it. And face stiff penalty if they choose not doing so, or fail to cease the actions after warning. A solution to the problem mentioned here, and a weapon against spam. Joy.
The main difference I think is the salespeople who have secret desires of taking all your money just like the big boys at Microsoft.
But other than that? Sure there's differences, and things missing. There's things missing from Unix too. Like Tux, I mean how could Linux be so cool without Tux?
Do yourself a favor and just look on your own before asking on Slashdot. Spend a day or two, or even a few hours, browsing electronics sites. Someone somewhere has surely already solved that problem. I've seen it... I just can't remember where I found it. But it's out there, so look for it. And whatever you do don't blindly trust what you read online. You'll probably need to work on it a bit to get it to work. If there isn't a mistake in it, or if something isn't clear, you will find that Murphy likes power supply projects:)
It's the FUN things I miss on Linux. There are so many games and it's a terrible pain in the ass to get them ALL running on Linux because most run on Windows only. Granted, there are ways, but most is an utter pain in the ass.
Oh and being a starving college student, I cannot even afford apps I am REQUIRED to have for my classes. All-M$ campus and all. UTTER pain in the ass. Visual Basic 6, Microsoft Frontpage, M$ Office, and other such as that. I simply don't have the money, and if I had to spend all that time in the computer lab at school I'd never get home.
What I want to see is Linux run - reliably and easily - all the Windows-based programs I know and love (Non-M$ made), as well as all the ones I know and hate(M$ crap).
What I'd also like to see is the average loser in the computer lab be sent to gay blue M$ hell.
"It says to start Notepad. How do I do that?"
So many of us are passing judgement based on what Microsoft pulled, and that is hardly a good idea, since Microsoft is well-known for such tactics. Let's instead wait and see what Sun does before passing judgement. Whatever the case, a subscription service is bound to save some people money. The real test will be what is done for the rest of us. If Sun can offer a flexible subscription plan that offers good incentives for those who upgrade frequently, while continuing to offer their products without the subscription service, they are certain to develop additional revenue while not betraying the community.
And with this revenue, they can continue to make valid contributions to the community. Which they can do simply because they have the money and resources to put to the task.
Well considering this, I am certain it should remain unregulated. However, as soon as it leaves the internet any regulations of the mode it enters should apply. In that way, it serves the best of both worlds, in that the internet remains free, and if it is used as a telecommunications service to call standard telephones the appropriate regulations would apply.
Slashdot Mirror
My glowing cyber balls are bigger than yours!
I suppose all these off-topic comments are justified because Tony Blair and George Bush have the big glowing cyber-balls to do what needs to be done without having to screw around with france?
Perhaps you posted this on a topic regarding CPU cooling so people would think you are cool? Well you're not, and that's way on topic. But I bet Saddam Hussein could use these units - his processors are gonna be running pretty hot when the napalm starts dropping.
The way I see it, no GUI is really better than any other except in the mind of the user. Not always true, but enough so for my following point. Some people think the Windows GUI is absolutely terrible. I actually like the Windows GUI, and I see it as an honest difference of opinion. Why do I like the Windows GUI? It's not better than any of the Linux GUI's, it's just more familiar to me. I've been using Windows for years, and I'm used to it. I'm sure a good many of you have your own favorite Linux GUI's for the exact same reason. And, like it or not, we work better when using a GUI we're familiar with, so people will usually stick with whatever they are most accustomed to if they have half a choice.
And really, I don't care if it looks like a horse's ass, if it works for you, then use it.
(And yes, I do use Windows XP (regrettably). Don't any of you dare say a word about it, or I'll stuff you in a garbage bag and ship you to M$. I mean it.)
For your car industry analogy, it's more like not being able to use the same gas without refining it yourself. You can't just install your programs on Linux - you have Red Hat versions, and Debian versions, etc.. While this may be ok for slashdot readers, for the masses it just doesn't work. With Windows, you pretty much know that .exe file will run on your machine, and if it doesn't you download it again or take the CDs back to the store and get them replaced.
Linux has several problems. The first is related to what I call the Windows Factor. This is the degree to which it has been dumbed down for the average computer (Windows) user. Linux just hasn't been reduced to their level yet, and trying to get these people working on Linux would be nothing but an exercise in futility. The next thing wrong with Linux is software. I've heard the arguements, open source alternatives blah blah, and while that may be true, I wanna play all the cool new computer games on my PC, and they aren't made for Linux. Another thing Linux lacks is marketing. When people start seeing ads for Linux on CNN maybe they'll start running it.
However, Linux DOES have stability, versatility, and power. Great for servers. I love linux for servers, and wouldn't touch Microsoft software for that purpose. Good for a number of small and large businesses too, if you get them weaned off of Microsoft Office (a task that Microsoft's pricing policies is indeed making easier). Not good for games, which today largely run only on Windows, or Windows and Mac at best, and thus not all that good for most home computing. Maybe when that is addressed, we can really get Linux going somewhere.
Herein lies the problem. Linux has too many GUI's. Hell, Linux has too many distributions. Most people want to pick up something and have it ready to use. They don't want dozens of GUI's and distributions. They just want it to work, and so far Windows has at least part of that down.
At risk to my own skin, I'm going to say that I think people LIKE Windows. As much as most people moan and gripe about it, Windows does one thing very well - you don't have to think to pick up Windows at Wal-Mart. They want to be able to install things without too many problems.
People don't want to have to think, so they buy Windows. Simply put, people are stupid. If you don't believe me try volunteering at a college computer lab. Your faith in human intelligence will be destroyed in about five minutes.
There are more troubling concerns about this...
"In news today, Microsoft has brought out the Microsoft Neural Windows Operating Systems. Critics complain that the EULA stipulates that any data, including neural data, is signed over to Microsoft after being uploaded, but the company downplays any possibility of this being used to gain ownership over individuals..."
If you think that's cool you'll LOVE this: Coolest site around
Way to be tolerant. I'm impressed.
Perhaps if you were less a student of religion and more a student of history you would realize that Christianity has arguably caused more evil overall than any other organization in history, with the possible exception of Nazi Germany.
Allow me to clarify. The longevity of the Roman empire was brought about by its openness and acceptance of the gods of others. They might not have always believed in them, but they respected them. Naturally they expected their own gods to be respected, and when the Christians told them to go to hell instead. This was, in fact, largely ignored until Nero blamed the burning of Rome on them, and they used it to turn public opinion their way, breed dissent, and bring down the Roman empire.
Or perhaps I should bring mention to the Inquisition. Contrary to what many think, it lasted from around the time Christians got real political power to around the time of the American colonies (remember the Salem witch trials?). They wanted to stamp out any and all other religions, and used whatever means necessary to do so. If you disobeyed, you would be murdered.
Now, add in the Crusades. The men who went didn't go for religious purposes. They went to loot, pillage, and rape, a task they fulfilled with grim efficiency. Well, ok, maybe some went for religious reasons, but not all that many of them were so deluded.
You can question the credibility of some of these claims, but they can each be backed up by historical fact. I will admit Christians weren't the only reason for the decline of rome, but they WERE one of the major factors in Rome's fall, and I challenge you all to provide to provide broad-based, credible proof that states otherwise.
And likewise, I challenge any of you to provide any real credible verifiable undeniable proof of the existance of the Christian god. I doubt it can be done.
If it's illegal for telemarketers to make calls to a cell phone, would it likewise be illegal for them to send e-mails to an address which is checked by a cell phone? Hmm...
Otherwise, let's start giving them our cell phone numbers, and then sue them into submission. C'mon it'll be fun, and our lawyers will love us for it.
You played sucky games then.
Ah you must be the expert on all things sucky then. Our school used to have a C-64, a network of Apples, and some really old sort of PC (I forget what it was). My fondest memory of those long-lost times is of screwing up the entire network of Apples. My second fondest memory is the time I got to spend playing the old games on those old computers. The old games were kinda cool in their own way
And don't knock text-based games. There were some of those that were really cool. I still play them once in a while too..
I could make some enlightened post that dazzles all who read it with its genius, but I won't. Instead I'll quote the character Dick from Shakespeare's Henry VI, part 2.
The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
[I]That sounds like a good way to kill the internet. Who's going to log on if they risk running up a $10,000 bill from some script kiddie who took over their machine?[/I]
People who don't use AOL and open every attachment that comes through their e-mail or instant messenger maybe?
I must be a total geek with what I put in my computer room. For one, it's the same as my bedroom. I bought two sheets of plywood and built a sturdy computer desk and a table for my TV to set beside it, as the conventional desks weren't tall enough for my queen sized bed. That wasn't enough. I built a headboard from plywood with bookshelves and now it's stuffed with computer books. For decorations, I have maps and things from various Dungeons & Dragons supplement (Forgotten Realms and Planescape mostly) and a few maps from national geographic. I have the usual litter of CD's, soda bottles (I drink straight from 2-liter soda bottles - more soda, less trips away from the computer), and various other things that seem to accumulate. But of course the most interesting feature is the cats that wander in every once in a while. They're annoyances but they're nice t have around.
It comes down to economics here. If you filter internet traffic, someone bound to complain about it sooner or later. Like when legitimate messages (such as winning e-bay bids) get classified as spam. I got a nice non-paying bidder complaint out of that because they couldn't get through the filter. So ISP's on the receiving end are in a lose/lose situation here. What we really need is a federal law requiring that the originator of malicious internet traffic, or perhaps excessive unrequested internet traffic, pay any fees associated with it. And face stiff penalty if they choose not doing so, or fail to cease the actions after warning. A solution to the problem mentioned here, and a weapon against spam. Joy.
The main difference I think is the salespeople who have secret desires of taking all your money just like the big boys at Microsoft. But other than that? Sure there's differences, and things missing. There's things missing from Unix too. Like Tux, I mean how could Linux be so cool without Tux?
Do yourself a favor and just look on your own before asking on Slashdot. Spend a day or two, or even a few hours, browsing electronics sites. Someone somewhere has surely already solved that problem. I've seen it... I just can't remember where I found it. But it's out there, so look for it. And whatever you do don't blindly trust what you read online. You'll probably need to work on it a bit to get it to work. If there isn't a mistake in it, or if something isn't clear, you will find that Murphy likes power supply projects :)
It's the FUN things I miss on Linux. There are so many games and it's a terrible pain in the ass to get them ALL running on Linux because most run on Windows only. Granted, there are ways, but most is an utter pain in the ass. Oh and being a starving college student, I cannot even afford apps I am REQUIRED to have for my classes. All-M$ campus and all. UTTER pain in the ass. Visual Basic 6, Microsoft Frontpage, M$ Office, and other such as that. I simply don't have the money, and if I had to spend all that time in the computer lab at school I'd never get home. What I want to see is Linux run - reliably and easily - all the Windows-based programs I know and love (Non-M$ made), as well as all the ones I know and hate(M$ crap). What I'd also like to see is the average loser in the computer lab be sent to gay blue M$ hell. "It says to start Notepad. How do I do that?"
So many of us are passing judgement based on what Microsoft pulled, and that is hardly a good idea, since Microsoft is well-known for such tactics. Let's instead wait and see what Sun does before passing judgement. Whatever the case, a subscription service is bound to save some people money. The real test will be what is done for the rest of us. If Sun can offer a flexible subscription plan that offers good incentives for those who upgrade frequently, while continuing to offer their products without the subscription service, they are certain to develop additional revenue while not betraying the community. And with this revenue, they can continue to make valid contributions to the community. Which they can do simply because they have the money and resources to put to the task.
Well considering this, I am certain it should remain unregulated. However, as soon as it leaves the internet any regulations of the mode it enters should apply. In that way, it serves the best of both worlds, in that the internet remains free, and if it is used as a telecommunications service to call standard telephones the appropriate regulations would apply.