Very common mantrafesto indeed. Apache, Linux, MySQL, Postgres, Firefox, and too many others to name were all yesterday's "next year's choice"-of-the-year choices, some of them more than once, but it so goes.
Considering Linux, Apache, and MySQL are a part of the LAMP stack I'm pretty sure they are well past "choice".
Any argument for the implementation of so-called 'trusted computing' is either inherently evil or incredibly stupid.
This is an incredibly naive and uninformed view on trusted computing. I was hesitant about trusted computing until I learned more about it. I have a TPM in my computer and it has a lot of good uses. Storing encryption keys in a tamper-proof chip is an excellent security enhancement. Software storage of keys is much more likely to be cracked. Also I can encrypt my entire drive or individual files and if needed I can delete the key and no one can access those files ever again. The mass hysteria around trusted computing is blown out of proportion. I have yet to encounter a circumstance where trusted computing has taken security or privacy away from me. It has only added security and privacy.
What does that mean? why would/tmp be a mount. And if it's a directory it has to be executable right?
He's suggesting that tmp be it's own partition (which is always a good idea in my opinion) and that it is mounted noexec which means binaries cannot be executed if they are located in/tmp. This in theory should make things safer but there are ways around it and it doesn't prevent scripts from being executed. It can also cause some problems with other software.
Culture barely changes a very tiny little every HUNDRED years.
This has nothing to do with culture. This has to do with the people in power in the 1930's and 1940's, namely the emperor. Japan is a democratic society now. Things are very different from 60-70 years ago when you put things in perspective. Culture is basically irrelevant to this conversation.
Yes you are showing your bias and what is worse you are contributing to what you say you hate.
That's was a nice hackjob you did on my quote. Are you a journalist by any chance? Maybe you would have understood what I was saying if you read the rest of it.
You also probably know that these two entirely different ideas could create three possible paths Linux can take for the future: stay geeky and appeal to the advanced tech guru in all of us; go mainstream and leave the advanced functionality and reliable kernel behind to compete with Microsoft and Apple; or face a "civil war" that could lead to total Linux annihilation.
That's quite a leap to make without giving any evidence at all. The article first mentions Con Kolivas' spat with Linus as if that is some kind of indicator of Linux's future when it means very little. It makes the assumption that CK's scheduler was more techinically advanced than Ingo Molnar's scheduler. That isn't the case. I don't think the author understands the reasons behind Linux choosing CFS over SD. It was more about maintainability than anything else. It was a decision that took into account long term issues instead of just short term emotions people had for CK and his scheduler.
The Linux community is an interesting group. Much like Republicans and Democrats, Linux is dominated by two factions with entirely different ideas. The conservatives want Linux to stay Linux and the liberals want to make money. Call me a conservative, or call me what you will, but the liberals are off-base.
When did this become a Republican/Democrat issue? Maybe I'm showing my bias here but how in the hell is the "liberal" wing in Linux all about making money? Isn't that the domain of Republicans? If you think that Linux really is split into a liberal wing and conservative wing the comparison would make more sense if the roles were reversed. Conservatives want this to be based about money and the free market. Conservatives would rather have corporations like HP choosing the direction of Linux based on their needs. Liberals are more worried about their rights with the software and abuses taking place by the corporations.
Even without taking the phoney political comparisons into consideration this article is an anti-Linux fluff piece with no meat at all. There is no critical thinking involved at all. It's purely an opinion without any facts to back it up. I wish garbage like this would stop showing up on Slashdot.
You do know what a package manager is don't you? Who downloads random packages from the web anymore? If your distro doesn't have an app in their official repository then most likely there is a third party repository that has what you are looking for, if not the application you are trying to install is probably some small, replaceable app. At least this has been my experience.
Gimp 2.4 supports color profiles. I have been using the beta for a while now and it is pretty stable. As for 16 or 32 bit channels it looks like we'll have to wait until GEGL is a reality and god knows when that is going to be.
I've found compiz fusion really stable on my Macbook 1.83Ghz Rev 1, which has an integrated intel something, which I think is what all this stability fuss is about?
I run compiz on an integrated intel and there are still problems. Compiz runs like a charm but accelerated video doesn't work with XAA. It works with EXA but text scrolling is incredibley slow and accelerated video is slower than unaccelerated video. I'm getting sick of broken video acceleration and was hoping the recent EXA improvements in the newest xorg would make a difference with the latest intel driver but it doesn't make a lick of difference.
Almost everyone I know that uses Microsoft Office at home, whether 2003 or 2007, uses the Student and Teacher (2003) or Home and Student (2007) non-commercial 5-seat version.
Just a correction but the Student and Teacher edition and the Home and Student editoin are 3 seat licenses, not 5.
I did not originally like Gconf, but today I think that gconf is pretty cool and I think that there is now an effort to revamp it into something new. I forget its name though, something D-Bus based, I also think that is pretty cool
I agree. I think gconf gets a bad rap. The replacement in the works is called dconf.
Yeah, and it only took them to version ELEVEN to figure out that people hated having their computers being commandeered. What's your apology for the other 10 versions of crap they put out until now? The first couple versions weren't bad, but then they got obnoxious real fast and I've also avoided them since.
It's obvious you haven't used version 10. I have heard a lot of hatred directed towards real but version 10 has been out for a while and it is a small, excellent applicatoin. Not only that but it uses GTK+ which fits in nicely with my GNOME desktop. I really can't find anything wrong with it and you haven't actually presented any real reason to hate it.
with the way things have been going lately though, open source developers may be the cause of their own destruction. Greed keeps pounding them in the head with a sledgehammer...it used to be they had on hats made of very strong steel...every time greed hits them though, that helmet keeps getting a little more dented...
Wow. And I thought the article was sensational. Exactly who is being greedy in this situation? Where is the money in all of this and what the fuck is your analogy supposed to mean?
Yes, but that's specific to the driver (and quite often the vendor provides a tool which writes an appropriate xorg.conf).
If other vendors had open source drivers this wouldn't be a problem. The intel drivers are built to work with with the existing X framework for display drivers. This isn't a vendor specifice issue as much as it is an open vs closed source issue. Closed source drivers do things in their own way and you can only blame the vendors for that.
But the smaller attacks that only effect a few systems can still be dangerous. And some of those smaller open source apps can be pretty common. Consider something like gaim/pidgin. It is a relatively small project, and I believe much of it was developed by students. Yet it is used by a lot of people, and it has had security issues in the past.
You glossed over the fact that is much easier to create your own malicious freeware (closed source) app than it is too try to sneak malicious code into an existing project that you do not have control of. Besides that I never said small projects don't have security issues. That really has nothing to do with what we are talking about which is purposely inserting malicious code into open source applications. Look how easy it is for people to create malware and get people to install it through social engineering. It's a more difficult task to sneak malicious code by maintainers of an open source project and have it accepted as is without being useful at all. It is a much more difficult task to create useful code that is also subversive. It's not impossible but is it really worth the time? If your code gets rejected for any reason, whether it is discovery, usefulness, or coding style you fail.
Second, with open source apps, you really don't know that. It is perfectly possible for someone to submit a bad patch and no one bothers to really look at it in depth (at least not as in depth as you would need to catch a well disguised security breach).
That's more difficult than it seems, at least for large projects. On large projects coding style is enforced, the code actually has to be pretty useful, and on projects like the kernel Linus trusts other longtime kernel hackers more than upstarts like CK. On smaller projects it may be easier to insert malicious code without anyone noticing but then if the project is that small how many people are really affected? In the FLOSS world of 18 text editors, most people probably aren't running the same software. I think it would be a lot easier to just code your own malicious freeware application behind closed doors.
I just ran an strace on GoogleEarth and it also reads/etc/passwd. I'm not so worried though because/etc/passwd is shadowed, none of my passwords (user and root) have passwords that can be dictionary attacked, and my system will timeout after 3 failed password attempts. That doesn't mean I don't want to know why Skype is reading/etc/passwd, but I agree the title of this article is sensational.
There not Linux specific (they're not even "Linux"), but you're right. Microsoft or Apple has someone that can make sure the parts all work together to provide a consistent experience. "Linux" doesn't have that (remember a few months back when gnome developers rejected Linus' patches?) Distros package stuff together, but they're primarily cat herders.
That's not what happened. Linus' bug fixes were accepted but GNOME was already in feature freeze at the time so no new features went in but some of his feature patches are kicking around in 2.19.x.
Seriously, the desktop lacks stuff that has been in Windoze since '95. The kernel works pretty good. We have pluggable storage okay.. but there's still basic holes in the usability (like changing the res on the fly when I move my laptop in and out of my office) that just need to get fixed.
I am using the the latest Intel display driver on my laptop and it fixes a lot of old problems with the driver. No more 915resolution, no more mode lines in xorg.conf, automatic detection of external monitors, etc. So what exactly does Linux lack that Windows 95 had? MS BOB?
The MS Office import filters are so *almost* there, but this app really needs to close the usability gap with Office. I have a semi-decent machine running Ubuntu, and even with Java disabled, it still takes what seems like forever to open a simple document that someone emails to me.
On a modern machine with an up-to-date version of java OpenOffice opens quick enough for me. About two seconds when cached, maybe 5-7 seconds on a cold boot. As for the filters I guess it all depends on what you need to view. I am not opening many very complicated Office documents so I never have problems but I wouldn't doubt that there are still issues with complex documents.
Actually, that's *exactly* what Linux could use for "the desktop". Having to recompile your kernel every time you change a tiny piece of hardware sucks. Yes, on these fast and modern machines, that isn't a *huge* issue, but do you really thing the average user is going to (want to) do that?
That's not true at all though. Most distros ship with kernels that have modules built for almost all hardware and the module simply loads when a piece of hardware is present. If you have a custom compiled kernel like I do all you have to do is build the module. You don't need to recompile the whole kernel and haven't had to do things that way for many years now.
At the least, parts, that can be, should be set as M, so they can get loaded as they are detected during boot. Just have something that does a scan on first boot, stores the hardware it finds in some location, then each boot after that it can scan for changes (shouldn't take long -- it doesn't in Windows land...) and compare the findings to the already stored config from first boot.
Hal and udev work quite well for me recognizing hardware and then loading support for it.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering Linux, Apache, and MySQL are a part of the LAMP stack I'm pretty sure they are well past "choice".
They forgot Avidemux. It's great for converting video files and it works on Windows and Linux.
I wish I still had my mod points.
From what I remember, only 'extreme' and server models of the architecture will have integrated controllers.
From what I've heard this is true for 2008 at least. I'm sure the technology will take over on more consumer level intel processors in 2009.
I didn't know GIMP was linux only. I always thought it could be run on multiple operating systems, primarily unix based ones.
Any argument for the implementation of so-called 'trusted computing' is either inherently evil or incredibly stupid.
This is an incredibly naive and uninformed view on trusted computing. I was hesitant about trusted computing until I learned more about it. I have a TPM in my computer and it has a lot of good uses. Storing encryption keys in a tamper-proof chip is an excellent security enhancement. Software storage of keys is much more likely to be cracked. Also I can encrypt my entire drive or individual files and if needed I can delete the key and no one can access those files ever again. The mass hysteria around trusted computing is blown out of proportion. I have yet to encounter a circumstance where trusted computing has taken security or privacy away from me. It has only added security and privacy.
What does that mean? why would /tmp be a mount. And if it's a directory it has to be executable right?
He's suggesting that tmp be it's own partition (which is always a good idea in my opinion) and that it is mounted noexec which means binaries cannot be executed if they are located in /tmp. This in theory should make things safer but there are ways around it and it doesn't prevent scripts from being executed. It can also cause some problems with other software.
Culture barely changes a very tiny little every HUNDRED years.
This has nothing to do with culture. This has to do with the people in power in the 1930's and 1940's, namely the emperor. Japan is a democratic society now. Things are very different from 60-70 years ago when you put things in perspective. Culture is basically irrelevant to this conversation.
That's quite a leap to make without giving any evidence at all. The article first mentions Con Kolivas' spat with Linus as if that is some kind of indicator of Linux's future when it means very little. It makes the assumption that CK's scheduler was more techinically advanced than Ingo Molnar's scheduler. That isn't the case. I don't think the author understands the reasons behind Linux choosing CFS over SD. It was more about maintainability than anything else. It was a decision that took into account long term issues instead of just short term emotions people had for CK and his scheduler.
When did this become a Republican/Democrat issue? Maybe I'm showing my bias here but how in the hell is the "liberal" wing in Linux all about making money? Isn't that the domain of Republicans? If you think that Linux really is split into a liberal wing and conservative wing the comparison would make more sense if the roles were reversed. Conservatives want this to be based about money and the free market. Conservatives would rather have corporations like HP choosing the direction of Linux based on their needs. Liberals are more worried about their rights with the software and abuses taking place by the corporations.
Even without taking the phoney political comparisons into consideration this article is an anti-Linux fluff piece with no meat at all. There is no critical thinking involved at all. It's purely an opinion without any facts to back it up. I wish garbage like this would stop showing up on Slashdot.
You do know what a package manager is don't you? Who downloads random packages from the web anymore? If your distro doesn't have an app in their official repository then most likely there is a third party repository that has what you are looking for, if not the application you are trying to install is probably some small, replaceable app. At least this has been my experience.
Gimp 2.4 supports color profiles. I have been using the beta for a while now and it is pretty stable. As for 16 or 32 bit channels it looks like we'll have to wait until GEGL is a reality and god knows when that is going to be.
I've found compiz fusion really stable on my Macbook 1.83Ghz Rev 1, which has an integrated intel something, which I think is what all this stability fuss is about?
I run compiz on an integrated intel and there are still problems. Compiz runs like a charm but accelerated video doesn't work with XAA. It works with EXA but text scrolling is incredibley slow and accelerated video is slower than unaccelerated video. I'm getting sick of broken video acceleration and was hoping the recent EXA improvements in the newest xorg would make a difference with the latest intel driver but it doesn't make a lick of difference.
Almost everyone I know that uses Microsoft Office at home, whether 2003 or 2007, uses the Student and Teacher (2003) or Home and Student (2007) non-commercial 5-seat version.
Just a correction but the Student and Teacher edition and the Home and Student editoin are 3 seat licenses, not 5.
I did not originally like Gconf, but today I think that gconf is pretty cool and I think that there is now an effort to revamp it into something new. I forget its name though, something D-Bus based, I also think that is pretty cool
I agree. I think gconf gets a bad rap. The replacement in the works is called dconf.
I use compiz on a GMA 950 without a hiccup. No slowdowns or artifacting.
Yeah, and it only took them to version ELEVEN to figure out that people hated having their computers being commandeered. What's your apology for the other 10 versions of crap they put out until now? The first couple versions weren't bad, but then they got obnoxious real fast and I've also avoided them since.
It's obvious you haven't used version 10. I have heard a lot of hatred directed towards real but version 10 has been out for a while and it is a small, excellent applicatoin. Not only that but it uses GTK+ which fits in nicely with my GNOME desktop. I really can't find anything wrong with it and you haven't actually presented any real reason to hate it.
with the way things have been going lately though, open source developers may be the cause of their own destruction. Greed keeps pounding them in the head with a sledgehammer...it used to be they had on hats made of very strong steel...every time greed hits them though, that helmet keeps getting a little more dented...
Wow. And I thought the article was sensational. Exactly who is being greedy in this situation? Where is the money in all of this and what the fuck is your analogy supposed to mean?
Yes, but that's specific to the driver (and quite often the vendor provides a tool which writes an appropriate xorg.conf).
If other vendors had open source drivers this wouldn't be a problem. The intel drivers are built to work with with the existing X framework for display drivers. This isn't a vendor specifice issue as much as it is an open vs closed source issue. Closed source drivers do things in their own way and you can only blame the vendors for that.
But the smaller attacks that only effect a few systems can still be dangerous. And some of those smaller open source apps can be pretty common. Consider something like gaim/pidgin. It is a relatively small project, and I believe much of it was developed by students. Yet it is used by a lot of people, and it has had security issues in the past.
You glossed over the fact that is much easier to create your own malicious freeware (closed source) app than it is too try to sneak malicious code into an existing project that you do not have control of. Besides that I never said small projects don't have security issues. That really has nothing to do with what we are talking about which is purposely inserting malicious code into open source applications. Look how easy it is for people to create malware and get people to install it through social engineering. It's a more difficult task to sneak malicious code by maintainers of an open source project and have it accepted as is without being useful at all. It is a much more difficult task to create useful code that is also subversive. It's not impossible but is it really worth the time? If your code gets rejected for any reason, whether it is discovery, usefulness, or coding style you fail.
Second, with open source apps, you really don't know that. It is perfectly possible for someone to submit a bad patch and no one bothers to really look at it in depth (at least not as in depth as you would need to catch a well disguised security breach).
That's more difficult than it seems, at least for large projects. On large projects coding style is enforced, the code actually has to be pretty useful, and on projects like the kernel Linus trusts other longtime kernel hackers more than upstarts like CK. On smaller projects it may be easier to insert malicious code without anyone noticing but then if the project is that small how many people are really affected? In the FLOSS world of 18 text editors, most people probably aren't running the same software. I think it would be a lot easier to just code your own malicious freeware application behind closed doors.
I just ran an strace on GoogleEarth and it also reads /etc/passwd. I'm not so worried though because /etc/passwd is shadowed, none of my passwords (user and root) have passwords that can be dictionary attacked, and my system will timeout after 3 failed password attempts. That doesn't mean I don't want to know why Skype is reading /etc/passwd, but I agree the title of this article is sensational.
There not Linux specific (they're not even "Linux"), but you're right. Microsoft or Apple has someone that can make sure the parts all work together to provide a consistent experience. "Linux" doesn't have that (remember a few months back when gnome developers rejected Linus' patches?) Distros package stuff together, but they're primarily cat herders.
That's not what happened. Linus' bug fixes were accepted but GNOME was already in feature freeze at the time so no new features went in but some of his feature patches are kicking around in 2.19.x.
Seriously, the desktop lacks stuff that has been in Windoze since '95. The kernel works pretty good. We have pluggable storage okay.. but there's still basic holes in the usability (like changing the res on the fly when I move my laptop in and out of my office) that just need to get fixed.
I am using the the latest Intel display driver on my laptop and it fixes a lot of old problems with the driver. No more 915resolution, no more mode lines in xorg.conf, automatic detection of external monitors, etc. So what exactly does Linux lack that Windows 95 had? MS BOB?
The MS Office import filters are so *almost* there, but this app really needs to close the usability gap with Office. I have a semi-decent machine running Ubuntu, and even with Java disabled, it still takes what seems like forever to open a simple document that someone emails to me.
On a modern machine with an up-to-date version of java OpenOffice opens quick enough for me. About two seconds when cached, maybe 5-7 seconds on a cold boot. As for the filters I guess it all depends on what you need to view. I am not opening many very complicated Office documents so I never have problems but I wouldn't doubt that there are still issues with complex documents.
Actually, that's *exactly* what Linux could use for "the desktop". Having to recompile your kernel every time you change a tiny piece of hardware sucks. Yes, on these fast and modern machines, that isn't a *huge* issue, but do you really thing the average user is going to (want to) do that?
That's not true at all though. Most distros ship with kernels that have modules built for almost all hardware and the module simply loads when a piece of hardware is present. If you have a custom compiled kernel like I do all you have to do is build the module. You don't need to recompile the whole kernel and haven't had to do things that way for many years now.
At the least, parts, that can be, should be set as M, so they can get loaded as they are detected during boot. Just have something that does a scan on first boot, stores the hardware it finds in some location, then each boot after that it can scan for changes (shouldn't take long -- it doesn't in Windows land...) and compare the findings to the already stored config from first boot.
Hal and udev work quite well for me recognizing hardware and then loading support for it.