If you guys are so all-fired excited about increasing moral, then hold an ethics class. If you're concerned about morale, though, some of these fun ideas may help.
that this gets the political debates out of the other stories on the main page. I get kind of sick of reading the comments in a post about Linux or technology or something and it just degenerates in a politics debate. Now if you want to debate politics, you have a section for it--GO THERE! I don't hold a lot of hope that it'll happen, but I did just watch Miracle last night, so who knows?
Yeah, I think the poster of the original article is not clear on the term "open source" that he uses. He indicates this in wondering if "industry officials" are aware that they can charge for open source stuff per the GPL. He is probably thinking of what I would call "source included". That would not be under an open redistribution license, as the GPL is. Most companies would not go for that because there's no way to make people buy it anymore.
But, DirectX 9 probably won't install on it, and that's the real killer.
Don't be so quick to speak of what you do not know. I do use Win98SE for gaming on a secondary machine and DirectX 9 installed just fine. You are very right about the memory issues. If you're just running a game or two, it won't mess up the memory much, and also there's more to play with since XP is such a memory hog.
Of course the standard UNIX filesystem scheme with/{bin,lib,sbin},/usr/{bin,lib,sbin},/usr/local/{bin,lib,sbin},/etc and/opt should be explained as well.
Oh, I couldn't agree more...so, um, care to explain a little? I'm relatively new to Linux, and this was one of the things that I've never found a good explanation of. I don't admin anything; I just installed and tried some distros on a desktop at home. What I didn't know was where to put stuff when I would download and want to install something. I ended up just installing things in subdirectories of my user directory because that's where they were downloaded and I was the only one who used that computer anyway.
So what kind of stuff goes where? Let's say I downloaded Azureus(which I did). Where should I install that? Let's say I install something from the package manager--where the heck did it put it?
If the library has a desire that access be from inside the library only, they should actions provide this. Access/security protocols or radio blocking walls/wallpaper/partitions.
How about something simpler? This happened because the library was closed. Shouldn't the library turn off the wireless transmitter when they close if they don't want people to use it outside?
In college, I had the bottom bunk, so I just hung blankets from the bunk and had a place to sleep that was darker than you could imagine. My roommate could still have the lights on and it didn't affect me.
This was modded funny, but it's right on. I saw this done by several people I knew in college. Sleeping patterns of two roommates frequently don't line up, so getting sleep when you want it is hard. The blanket thing is so easy (if you have bunk beds) and works great.
[...]would have a much easier life if they got a copy of XP to dual boot with.
How about an old copy of Win98SE instead? It would take up less system resources, be cheaper, and it's not going to have many stability issues if your're just using it to play games with instead of installing a bunch of other apps. It also doesn't have that whole registering problem that XP came out with. "One disc to install them all..."
So what? This guy was doing a favor for Phillips by making their binary driver integrate via this "hook" into the kernel. No reason why that has to be the case. They can do an all-binary driver like Nvidia does, and it works just as well. Then, the kernel guys are happy because it's not touching their precioussss GPL stuff.
Music labels fear that the convenience of MacLean's software will lead millions more to copy and distribute songs over file-sharing networks such as KaZaA, a music industry source said.
They just can't get off that issue, can they? Don't they get it? They don't want to use this for file sharing; they want to record stuff to listen to later. This is one of the types of changes that can keep people from going to file sharing. People would pay $10 a month for a wide variety of songs and exclusive concerts and such that they could record. People are indirectly paying you for this through their XM subscriptions, and you STILL don't like it. What the heck is wrong with you?
I call bullshit on that statement. First of all, the ruling authority is the Sony vs. Universal (Betamax) case which grants individuals the fair use right to record television shows for personal viewing and sharing, also called timeshifting.
Oh man, you were so close. Leave out the word sharing and you've got it!
Re:Hey linux trolls! Brand new linux distro is out
on
FreeBSD 5.3 Beta1
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
The mods are fighting over it. I saw 60% troll and 40% funny on it.
Well, this is how you can get twice the stories from a slow news day. You get to post the scary rumor story and then you get to post the "scary rumor found untrue" story.
OK, I had that in mind, about the change from DOS-based to NT-based systems as being a valid reason for the Windows driver incompatibility, but I didn't bring it up because I thought I would just get accused of being a fanboy making excuses. Since you brought it up then, that's a massive changeover that doesn't come along very often for Windows. Linux hasn't been making such a foundational change like that, so why can't they keep some compatibility between revs?
That is where your argument completely falls apart. That binary is *NOT* going to work with different kernels. My friend has a Canon printer that will not work under WinXP desptite the fact that he has binary drivers for Win98. A coworker has a card that will not work with Linux 2.6 even though he has a binary driver for 2.4.
Not falling apart--that's my point exactly. I think that was pretty lame of XP and I think it's pretty lame of the Linux kernels too. I also had the same problem with an Apollo P-1200 printer I had that worked fine with its driver on Win98. That driver wouldn't work on XP, so I checked Apollo's website to get a new driver, and it just said, "No new driver needed--XP includes a driver for the P-1200 on the CD." Uh, yeah, XP detects it and automatically installs the driver, which doesn't work. It just puts out a few lines of garbage at the top of the page and then feeds the paper out--great driver ya got there. I did some Google searching and found that since Apollo is based on HP technology, you can just set it up as an HP Deskjet 500, and it works just fine.
Anyway, it would seem to me that they could have a translation wrapper that wouldn't even have to be specific to the hardware. See what types of calls to Win98 the driver is trying to do and then "translate" those to the equivalent calls in XP and vice versa on the return side--no knowledge of the device needed. MS would just need to know the difference in the I/O interface between two of its own products. I understand that extra processing would introduce a little bit of in-line delay, so it probably wouldn't work very well for really fast, high end video cards that rely on speed a lot, but for printers? An extra second or two wouldn't make any difference.
I see these comments that don't make any sense to me like, "If the manufacturer goes out of business, your hardware becomes useless." Huh? I still have a driver for it, and the hardware still works, so why do you seem to think one or the other is going to self destruct when the company goes under? And if you have a driver, why would it not work with later versions of the OS? I see that as more of a problem with an OS when the new version will immediately not work with an older driver, and all the older drivers have to be rewritten to work with the newer version of OS.
Depending on how they define this, it may not be of much use to many non-1337 Linux users. Detectability is what would be a lot more useful. My first experiences trying to install Linux (about last year, so not too long ago) were that my sound card and (S3) video card were not found on install from any distro. From searching the web, I found several places where people would say they had gotten those devices to work, but it involved running some script they wrote, compiling and loading modules, or compiling a custom kernel. I wouldn't really consider that as being very "compatible".
Unfortunately I forget the material they're using (I did a presentation on it a while ago) but once you "read" from it the light rearranges the structure and data is lost. So right now they're one time write and one time read devices.
Thus, the hardware costs would be a draw and the cost comparison would actually be about software.
You underestimate the creativity of the marketing mind. There are still outs, like for their test in that situation, they would "purchase" their version of Windows Server 2003 at their OEM discount rate of $50 or whatever, while buying their version of Red Hat Enterprise Whiz-bang Edition with 10 year on-site support contract for $5,000 or something.
I didn't bother checking, but most advertising boards are self-regulating groups that actually have zero real authority.
I was wondering that. What kind of penalty will be/can be enforced on them for this? Or is this just one of those, "We just want to officially state for the record that you are a big poop head and did a no-no." things?
This is why in my high school physics class, our teacher was very particular that we expressed a temperature measurement as 30 degrees Celcius, versus a temperature change as 30 Celcius degrees. It was a standard that helped to keep things straight when we were reading questions on tests and such.
Slashdot Mirror
that this gets the political debates out of the other stories on the main page. I get kind of sick of reading the comments in a post about Linux or technology or something and it just degenerates in a politics debate. Now if you want to debate politics, you have a section for it--GO THERE!
I don't hold a lot of hope that it'll happen, but I did just watch Miracle last night, so who knows?
Yeah, I think the poster of the original article is not clear on the term "open source" that he uses. He indicates this in wondering if "industry officials" are aware that they can charge for open source stuff per the GPL. He is probably thinking of what I would call "source included". That would not be under an open redistribution license, as the GPL is. Most companies would not go for that because there's no way to make people buy it anymore.
So what kind of stuff goes where? Let's say I downloaded Azureus(which I did). Where should I install that? Let's say I install something from the package manager--where the heck did it put it?
So what? This guy was doing a favor for Phillips by making their binary driver integrate via this "hook" into the kernel. No reason why that has to be the case. They can do an all-binary driver like Nvidia does, and it works just as well. Then, the kernel guys are happy because it's not touching their precioussss GPL stuff.
The mods are fighting over it. I saw 60% troll and 40% funny on it.
Well, this is how you can get twice the stories from a slow news day. You get to post the scary rumor story and then you get to post the "scary rumor found untrue" story.
A bicycle for my fish...
Eben-Wan Kenobi: "I don't think so."
OK, so the "back down" is directed the other direction, but it sounds so right, doesn't it?
OK, I had that in mind, about the change from DOS-based to NT-based systems as being a valid reason for the Windows driver incompatibility, but I didn't bring it up because I thought I would just get accused of being a fanboy making excuses. Since you brought it up then, that's a massive changeover that doesn't come along very often for Windows. Linux hasn't been making such a foundational change like that, so why can't they keep some compatibility between revs?
Anyway, it would seem to me that they could have a translation wrapper that wouldn't even have to be specific to the hardware. See what types of calls to Win98 the driver is trying to do and then "translate" those to the equivalent calls in XP and vice versa on the return side--no knowledge of the device needed. MS would just need to know the difference in the I/O interface between two of its own products. I understand that extra processing would introduce a little bit of in-line delay, so it probably wouldn't work very well for really fast, high end video cards that rely on speed a lot, but for printers? An extra second or two wouldn't make any difference.
I see these comments that don't make any sense to me like, "If the manufacturer goes out of business, your hardware becomes useless." Huh? I still have a driver for it, and the hardware still works, so why do you seem to think one or the other is going to self destruct when the company goes under? And if you have a driver, why would it not work with later versions of the OS? I see that as more of a problem with an OS when the new version will immediately not work with an older driver, and all the older drivers have to be rewritten to work with the newer version of OS.
Depending on how they define this, it may not be of much use to many non-1337 Linux users. Detectability is what would be a lot more useful. My first experiences trying to install Linux (about last year, so not too long ago) were that my sound card and (S3) video card were not found on install from any distro. From searching the web, I found several places where people would say they had gotten those devices to work, but it involved running some script they wrote, compiling and loading modules, or compiling a custom kernel. I wouldn't really consider that as being very "compatible".
This is why in my high school physics class, our teacher was very particular that we expressed a temperature measurement as 30 degrees Celcius, versus a temperature change as 30 Celcius degrees. It was a standard that helped to keep things straight when we were reading questions on tests and such.