everyone who values their data must make backups, whether they are planning an OS migration or not. the only "agony of saving/transferring data" is that they must restore their backup once.
The earliest memory I have of writing a research paper was in fifth grade. We were instructed that using an encyclopedia could be useful for learning more about a topic, such as related issues or questions to investigate, but that it was not a viable reference source suitable for citation in the research itself.
In fact, throughout all my years of education, I can never remember a single instance in which it would have been acceptable to cite, for example, the Encyclopedia Britannica as a reference source.
Anyone who is citing Wikipedia as a source is a fool -- not for citing Wikipedia instead of a more expensive bound volume, but for citing an encyclopedia at all.
To say that Wikipedia is not suitable for citation in a formal argument or research paper is not really a criticism of its quality... that's just something that's common to anything of the "-pedia" persuasion.
No, package management is a strength of an operating system, not a liability. When the OS "vendor" (e.g., Red Hat, Mandriva, Debian, etc.) is the one who is responsible for delivering your web browser, sound apps, games, and so forth, that means you only have to go to one place for all your security/stability/what-have-you updates.
Contrast Windows Update: the bare core of the OS, and a few things like your browser, mail client, and a crashy video player get updated. Only recently does it also update your office suite. This means that even if you keep your box up-to-the-second on Windows Update, there's a strong chance that there is a lot of software on your system that is getting stale.
Now, back to Synaptic/Click-n-Run/etc.: When you want a new program, you open up your graphical software installer, and browse through things that are available, organized by category. You select what you want, it finds the dependencies, and installs them. It will also suggest other things you might want -- plugins for an audio editor, for example. While you're there, you can uninstall anything you've stopped using, and upgrade everything on the system, to patch any security bugs. This is what most people would describe as an integrated vertical software solution.
Contrast the "Executable Installer" model: You open up a web browser, and start doing keyword searches of the Entire Fricking Web for software. You're bombarded with trials, demos, popups, and people who want you to install spyware or buy the "Pro" version of something you've never used. When you're ready to install it, you download an executable binary from a third party and run it with full administrative privileges. This model is pure chaos.
Perhaps for you, placing packages in a 'magic' location on the hard disk is an easy way to install things. Of course, you're going to be the one with a gigantic red bullseye painted on your system when someone's got a zlib exploit in hand, and you've got 80 copies of zlib, one in each of those absurd, unmanaged application bundles.
of course, all those in-flight catalogs selling noise-canceling headphones -- not to mention all the people i've seen using them on flight after flight after flight -- i dunno, it kind of makes me wonder if you're not just lying through your teeth.
why not take the input from the mic, reverse-phase it via software, and output it through the speaker?
well, i suppose the howling, squealing feedback would make you forget about the server fans for a few seconds, but i suspect it would just end up giving you a bigger headache in the long run.
well... protools it was a de facto standard four or five years ago. but things have changed since then. samplitude, paris, digital performer, and a host of other commercial DAWs have been steadily digging into the protools market, as well as becoming the entry choice for those who are still coming over from non-software systems.
ardour's hardware support proceeds from the ALSA driver base and the extremely flexible JACK audio routing framework. anyone who tells you that there are no professional-grade interfaces to pair with this application is either lying to you, or they simply haven't researched the matter at all.
to claim that ardour cannot succeed because protools (which is crashy, expensive, and unwieldy) already has market share is sheer ignorance.
Re:This is why Linux isn't more popular....
on
Linux Instant Messengers
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
those dependencies do, of course, exist in windows. the methods for "handling" them are just much cruder than with APT or Portage.
generally, there are two methods that the "executable installer" model uses to deal with library dependencies: 1) the library's already there? just overwrite it, we're the only app in the universe! or 2) just stuff it all in a directory somewhere. we'll keep our own private copy of every library -- nothing says "security" like 90 slightly different copies of zlib!
people who are still talking about "RPM dependency hell" or "featureless Gaim" are living 2 years in the past. if they don't like Linux... fine, don't use it. but don't bother me with a bunch of stories from 30 versions ago about how you couldn't get it working.
If you make Linux look like Windows, people will expect it to work like Windows... and Linux does not work like Windows. Eventually, they will discover that, despite its appearance, it does not work like Windows. When they discover this, they will feel deceived and disoriented.
Making Linux more like Windows is simply the usability version of a very nasty kludge. Sure, some users will get some things done faster if you imitate by rote the steps they are used to -- but that's a very poor plan for interface design.
Better than testing how well Windows users figure out a Linux GUI would be to find out how people who have no substantial computing experience figure it out. Windows users have too many years of things to unlearn. It would be a grave mistake to compromise Linux GUI systems simply to match the memorized rituals of the users of a particular system.
as if the explosions, leaking fuel, strong currents, and risk of nuclear waste exposure weren't enough, now marine wildlife have to deal with loud sounds! oh, the humanity!
(apparently, not everybody knows that distributing music for which you haven't obtained a license is subject to civil damages, and in certain cases is a criminal offense.)
the problem today with gazillions of copies of the same library isn't that they waste disk space -- it's that they each present an independent pathway for security failure.
for example, if you only have one copy of zlib on your system, and it's managed by the OS vendor (up2date, apt, or similar), then you only have one copy of zlib that can be exploited, and you only have to worry about applying your vendor's updates to keep all of your zlib activity patched.
if you have 80 copies of zlib, each one shipped by a different application that uses the library, you've got a frigging mess on your hands, and you've probably got no hope of patching them all if there's a security bug.
what we need is more centralization of libraries, not the wild-west free-for-all that would result from what you're advocating.
whoever modded this redundant is an idiot. this is THE answer to the question. get yourself an attorney -- this won't take 2 hours to draw up. if you can't find a few hundred dollars for an attorney to assist with the contract, you should probably ask yourself if your code is worth owning.
opening a new window takes 0.5 seconds. a cold start of firefox takes 1.8 seconds. this is a 2.0 GHz AMD system with 1.0GB of memory. I have fifteen extensions installed, including the google toolbar, web developer, tab browser preferences, gmail notifier, and all-in-one gestures.
perhaps there is something else wrong with your system.
Slashdot Mirror
everyone who values their data must make backups, whether they are planning an OS migration or not. the only "agony of saving/transferring data" is that they must restore their backup once.
just encrypt the usernames. now you can leverage your existing authentication to move forward with a two-factor security plan!
I suppose this is only a problem if you're already bigoted against anything "Inc."
it's ... it's almost ... it's as if people in different parts of the world have different cultural values!
You think an encyclopedia is referenceable?
In fact, throughout all my years of education, I can never remember a single instance in which it would have been acceptable to cite, for example, the Encyclopedia Britannica as a reference source.
Anyone who is citing Wikipedia as a source is a fool -- not for citing Wikipedia instead of a more expensive bound volume, but for citing an encyclopedia at all.
To say that Wikipedia is not suitable for citation in a formal argument or research paper is not really a criticism of its quality... that's just something that's common to anything of the "-pedia" persuasion.
Contrast Windows Update: the bare core of the OS, and a few things like your browser, mail client, and a crashy video player get updated. Only recently does it also update your office suite. This means that even if you keep your box up-to-the-second on Windows Update, there's a strong chance that there is a lot of software on your system that is getting stale.
Now, back to Synaptic/Click-n-Run/etc.: When you want a new program, you open up your graphical software installer, and browse through things that are available, organized by category. You select what you want, it finds the dependencies, and installs them. It will also suggest other things you might want -- plugins for an audio editor, for example. While you're there, you can uninstall anything you've stopped using, and upgrade everything on the system, to patch any security bugs. This is what most people would describe as an integrated vertical software solution.
Contrast the "Executable Installer" model: You open up a web browser, and start doing keyword searches of the Entire Fricking Web for software. You're bombarded with trials, demos, popups, and people who want you to install spyware or buy the "Pro" version of something you've never used. When you're ready to install it, you download an executable binary from a third party and run it with full administrative privileges. This model is pure chaos.
Perhaps for you, placing packages in a 'magic' location on the hard disk is an easy way to install things. Of course, you're going to be the one with a gigantic red bullseye painted on your system when someone's got a zlib exploit in hand, and you've got 80 copies of zlib, one in each of those absurd, unmanaged application bundles.
of course, all those in-flight catalogs selling noise-canceling headphones -- not to mention all the people i've seen using them on flight after flight after flight -- i dunno, it kind of makes me wonder if you're not just lying through your teeth.
why not take the input from the mic, reverse-phase it via software, and output it through the speaker? well, i suppose the howling, squealing feedback would make you forget about the server fans for a few seconds, but i suspect it would just end up giving you a bigger headache in the long run.
ardour's hardware support proceeds from the ALSA driver base and the extremely flexible JACK audio routing framework. anyone who tells you that there are no professional-grade interfaces to pair with this application is either lying to you, or they simply haven't researched the matter at all.
to claim that ardour cannot succeed because protools (which is crashy, expensive, and unwieldy) already has market share is sheer ignorance.
generally, there are two methods that the "executable installer" model uses to deal with library dependencies: 1) the library's already there? just overwrite it, we're the only app in the universe! or 2) just stuff it all in a directory somewhere. we'll keep our own private copy of every library -- nothing says "security" like 90 slightly different copies of zlib!
people who are still talking about "RPM dependency hell" or "featureless Gaim" are living 2 years in the past. if they don't like Linux... fine, don't use it. but don't bother me with a bunch of stories from 30 versions ago about how you couldn't get it working.
http://ohlssonvox.8k.com/fdd_raid.htm
Making Linux more like Windows is simply the usability version of a very nasty kludge. Sure, some users will get some things done faster if you imitate by rote the steps they are used to -- but that's a very poor plan for interface design.
Better than testing how well Windows users figure out a Linux GUI would be to find out how people who have no substantial computing experience figure it out. Windows users have too many years of things to unlearn. It would be a grave mistake to compromise Linux GUI systems simply to match the memorized rituals of the users of a particular system.
cmr@freawaru ~ $ hi!
as if the explosions, leaking fuel, strong currents, and risk of nuclear waste exposure weren't enough, now marine wildlife have to deal with loud sounds! oh, the humanity!
the "-g" must stand for "gentoo"
(apparently, not everybody knows that distributing music for which you haven't obtained a license is subject to civil damages, and in certain cases is a criminal offense.)
whose 'cp' you usin dude? gnu coreutils cp says 'invalid option -- g'.
for example, if you only have one copy of zlib on your system, and it's managed by the OS vendor (up2date, apt, or similar), then you only have one copy of zlib that can be exploited, and you only have to worry about applying your vendor's updates to keep all of your zlib activity patched.
if you have 80 copies of zlib, each one shipped by a different application that uses the library, you've got a frigging mess on your hands, and you've probably got no hope of patching them all if there's a security bug.
what we need is more centralization of libraries, not the wild-west free-for-all that would result from what you're advocating.
whoever modded this redundant is an idiot. this is THE answer to the question. get yourself an attorney -- this won't take 2 hours to draw up. if you can't find a few hundred dollars for an attorney to assist with the contract, you should probably ask yourself if your code is worth owning.
you work for A9? cool!!
opera has around 0.09% of the browser market. google's time would be better spent on a custom distribution of Lynx.
perhaps there is something else wrong with your system.
i think i'll hang onto firefox, if you don't mind, as long as opera is still a crashing, humiliating farce of a web browser.
no, seriously, it doesn't rewrite the image URLs. i promise i'm not lying!