Nice as an option, but frankly running any kind of a feed from my xBox in the living to my PC in my office and back to my TV next to the Xbox would be somewhat problematic.
If you use XBox Live then you probably already have your XBox hooked up to your home network or router. You don't need to run the feed back and forth as you claim, you just need a single run of CAT 5, or you could go wireless. I use my XBox (running Linux) to stream media from my Linux fileserver all the time.
Also, in my opinion there was no significant difference between the two platforms regarding their speed on this benchmark. The difference between 1st and 2nd place, regardless of who won that test, was between 5 and 12%. I don't start to get interested until there is at least 20% difference
How about cost? The Xeons cost twice as much as the Opterons, and the Opterons give equivalent or better performance! Although you are correct that the performance difference may not be staggering (and between top of the line chips, who would expect it to be?), the price/performance ratio certainly is.
You see, THAT'S THE PROBLEM. The most popular Linux distros let you easily turn on all sorts of insecure things without so much as a warning.
I just installed Debian a few days ago (using the new installer, which is very nice BTW). The base install doesn't come with telnet, ssh or much of anything. When I installed ssh (apt-get install ssh) the configurations asked me if I wanted to start and run the sshd daemon, it did not automatically start it. Besides, a simple ps -A should tell you if telnetd or sshd is running. Don't blame Debian for not paying attention and bad configuration.
If what you're saying is true, Linux on the XBox must boot in under 6 seconds!
I highly doubt it. I'm not saying you are lying, just that you're obviously missing some facts somewhere.
What are you talking about? I was clearly speaking of the boot-up times of the native XBox OS (a stripped down Win2K kernel). Hence "Full boot (from pushing the button to seeing the dashboard) takes probably 10 seconds." The dashboard is the UI of the XBox if you weren't aware. At the end of my comment I was merely mentioning that my XBox also runs Linux. This is not related to the native booting, which is why I prefaced it with "BTW" and put it in parentheses.
I have a x86 appliance that boots fast, it's called an XBox. IIRC the stripped down Windows 2K kernel fits in 256K of onboard firmware and also contains the opening animation (so it LOOKS like it is instantly booting). Full boot (from pushing the button to seeing the dashboard) takes probably 10 seconds. If Microsoft can make a x86 appliance, ANYONE can.
(BTW, my XBox also runs Linux great, and is a terrific emualtion platform.)
I agree, I stopped watching the Simpsons about four or five years ago when they stopped being that funny. Know what, I STILL get all the Simpsons references people (on/. and elsewhere) make, because they're all from older episodes!
Re:The only feature which is better in Windows...
on
Review: KDE 3.2
·
· Score: 0
First people complain that a computer should make decisions for the user to keep the interface usable by newbies and stuff and then people complains that a computer should only do what the user tells it to.
This isn't he same thing as having sane defaults and such, I think it's more a matter of internal consistancy. When I tell something to "open" I expect it to do just that. However, when Windows says "open" a folder I think it really means "display" or "view", which is not always the same thing as "open".
I guess you just can't please everyone
That's certainly true. The OP thought that Window's behaviour was a feature. I find it internally inconsistent and irritating. Who is right?
So why don't you go to Folder Options and tell Windows to open seperate windows for each folder? It's as simple as clicking a checkbox. This was actually the default behavior in Windows 95.
I don't want every folder in it's own Window. This is an entirely different thing from what I am talking about (read the OP again). Yes, I know about this "feature" and it stinks, using this method of navigation you can end up with a dozen folders open very quickly. However, due to Windows's shortcomings (no view splitting) I do need to open multiple file manager windows frequently, and I would like to open the same directory in multiple windows to aid navigation. Entirely different things.
Re:The only feature which is better in Windows...
on
Review: KDE 3.2
·
· Score: 1
I guess it depends on what you and I want to "tell" the computer to do; I want to tell it to simply give me the window with that folder open or create one if it doesn't exist
I see your point, but IMHO clicking on a folder means "open" not "display". When I open a folder from the File menu it says it right there, Open, which is what I think it should do, even if I already have that folder opened somewhere else. Of course, this is just MHO.
(for me multiple copies are a hazzle since when I have 10+ windows open the paths can no longer be seen when they're minimized to Kicker)
I don't really have this problem on KDE. With multiple desktops (I only have apps on that desktop display in the taskbar) and tabs in my shell (Konsole), file manager (Konqueror), and browser (Mozilla) I usually have no problem finding stuff in my taskbar. In Windows the taskbar is always crowded, which is probably why they developed this mis-feature in the first place.
Konqueror has the "Duplicate Window" (Ctrl+D) feature in the Location menu. I don't remember if Windows has a similar feature or not (it's been a while since I last used it) but in my opinion one good solution might be to bring the same window to front if you already have it open but open a duplicate through the menu.
Yes this would be a good solution, unfortunately Windows does not have this feature. Nor does it let you "open this folder in a new window" or any such thing. Basically, Konqueror is so much more featureful than the explorer file manager it's not even funny.
Re:The only feature which is better in Windows...
on
Review: KDE 3.2
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
but there is one thing that Windows does better: When you're browsing directories and open a folder that you've already opened but minimized (or hid behind another window) Windows brings that to front instead of opening the same folder again in a new window
God, I hate that about Windows. If I ask my computer to open two windows of the same folder then it should do it! Windows assumes what I want and tries to second guess me (oh, you don't really want to open that folder again, do you?). KDE does what I tell it to do, which IMHO is what a computer should do. It is not the computers job to read my thoughts and try to figure out what I "really" mean.
Here's a situation where this particular "feature" annoys me. Since the default explorer file manager doesn't have view splitting it is necessary to have many folders open in order to drag and drop files. If I have "my documents" open and I'd like to drag something to a subfolder I'd like to open up a second copy of "my documents", navigate to the subfolder, and drag my files. Windows won't do this, I have to navigate away from "my documents" in order to open a new copy, which disrupts my workflow and is irritating. Of course, all of this is totally unnecessary in Konqueror, where view splitting and tabs make life so much more enjoyable.
Operating System:
Microsoft Windows NT(R) Workstation 4.0, Windows NT Server 4.0 with Service Pack 6a or later, Windows 2000 Professional, Windows 2000 Server, Windows XP Professional, or Windows Server 2003
Not necessarily. The $200 billion spent on the war in Iraq is money which won't be spent on new programs and R&D. Defense contractors benefit the most when things are tense, but no actual fighting is going on. The Cold War years were good to defense contractor.
Shakespeare, Mozart etc. lived in a time in which widespread unauthorized copying of works was also much more difficult.
Umm, no. AFAIK there was no way for Shakespeare to prevent other acting troupes from performing his plays, in fact this was a fairly common occurence. BTW, Shakespeare did not support himself by writing plays, he supported himself by acting out the plays he wrote. Sorry, can't really comment on Mozart, but it's pretty likely his works were performed all over Europe without his permission.
The design of the USAF and USN versions are not being compromised for the STOVL version. The other versions won't even have a lift fan, or anything related to the STOVL aspect. Further, the STOVL version is a relatively small piece of the program, only about 300 or so will be bought by the Marines. In contrast, several thousand of the conventionl version will be bought by the USAF, with a similar number for the Navy version. There are uses for jump jets, for example for taking off and landing in places where you don't have a runway. However, as you can see by the purchase numbers in no way are STOVL aircraft going to replace conventional ones.
You do know that there are three different versions of the JSF don't you, a conventinal one for the AF, a carrier version for the Navy and the Marine STOVL version. They will share many common parts, making them cheaper than three separate planes, but will still be very individualistic.
I have no idea what you think is so bad about the lift fan design, what "enourmous mechanical stresses" are you talking about which aren't present in a traditional STOVL aircraft? Harriers and the Boeing JSF entry both create lift with exhust nozzles from the engine. This design is on the ragged edge of stability, it barely creates enough lift to lift the aircraft and has the inherrent danger that if the engine inhales its own exhaust it can stall, which is a very bad thing when you're trying to take off or land! The lift fan is a revolutionary design which creates a cushion of cooler air below the aircraft, eliminating the intake threat and has an excess of lift capacity. The initial test was amazing, the plane literally shot up 20 feet! The design has won numerous awards as well, you are the first I have heard to disparage it.
What are the options for video teleconferencing between Windows and Linux? I use Linux at home, but my parents two states away are Windows users. We've been trying to use Gnomemeeting/Netmeeting for several months now with mixed sucess. It seems that most of the problems seem to be on the Netmeeting end, but with Microsoft retiring Netmeeting there's little hope to get this resolved and Netmeeting doesn't appear to be a viable choice for the future. Are there any other options out there?
Re:Windows for desktop Linux for servers...
on
On The Death Of Unix
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Linux is great, but it's not for the masses, and there is no money to be made with Linux on the desktop (well not much)
There's probably little money to be made in desktop Linux, but there's plenty to be saved. The adoption will come first on the corporate desktop, where you can roll out thousands of identical boxes and there are trained people to support them. Linux is just as easy to use as Windows, it's more difficult to administer if you have no idea what you're doing, but easier if you do. Corporate users typically don't install any hardware, another area where Linux is typically weaker than Windows. Corporate users typically don't even install software, leaving this to the support personnel as well. The savings of switching to Linux are substantial, and will become very attractive to corporate users soon. Extensive home use will follow wide corporate use. However, this will happen slowly due to MS's huge installed base. Plus, MS won't sit idly by and let this happen, they will fight it with all their considerable resources. Should be interesting to watch!
Re:cast aluminum is the only way to go
on
Project Plex-Box
·
· Score: 1
As for anodizing...way out of date. Today, items like this are powder-coated.
No, aluminum is still frequently anodized. Is it even possible to powder coat aluminum? AFAIK powder coating is for steels and such.
RedHat does not disable your operating system if you opt out of the subscription or upgrade your machine.
Can you show me evidence that Microsoft has ever disabled someone's computer for failure to upgrade?
The parent is refering to XP product activation. If you change too much stuff in your machine, or try to move the install to a new machine Windows will lock you out until you call Microsoft to reactivate.
Slashdot Mirror
Donate. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. ;)
If you use XBox Live then you probably already have your XBox hooked up to your home network or router. You don't need to run the feed back and forth as you claim, you just need a single run of CAT 5, or you could go wireless. I use my XBox (running Linux) to stream media from my Linux fileserver all the time.
How about cost? The Xeons cost twice as much as the Opterons, and the Opterons give equivalent or better performance! Although you are correct that the performance difference may not be staggering (and between top of the line chips, who would expect it to be?), the price/performance ratio certainly is.
What's wrong with the split command? I believe the file parts are reassembled by just cating them together.
When it starts making them money?
And if you have a laptop?
I just installed Debian a few days ago (using the new installer, which is very nice BTW). The base install doesn't come with telnet, ssh or much of anything. When I installed ssh (apt-get install ssh) the configurations asked me if I wanted to start and run the sshd daemon, it did not automatically start it. Besides, a simple ps -A should tell you if telnetd or sshd is running. Don't blame Debian for not paying attention and bad configuration.
What are you talking about? I was clearly speaking of the boot-up times of the native XBox OS (a stripped down Win2K kernel). Hence "Full boot (from pushing the button to seeing the dashboard) takes probably 10 seconds." The dashboard is the UI of the XBox if you weren't aware. At the end of my comment I was merely mentioning that my XBox also runs Linux. This is not related to the native booting, which is why I prefaced it with "BTW" and put it in parentheses.
(BTW, my XBox also runs Linux great, and is a terrific emualtion platform.)
I agree, I stopped watching the Simpsons about four or five years ago when they stopped being that funny. Know what, I STILL get all the Simpsons references people (on /. and elsewhere) make, because they're all from older episodes!
This isn't he same thing as having sane defaults and such, I think it's more a matter of internal consistancy. When I tell something to "open" I expect it to do just that. However, when Windows says "open" a folder I think it really means "display" or "view", which is not always the same thing as "open".
I guess you just can't please everyone
That's certainly true. The OP thought that Window's behaviour was a feature. I find it internally inconsistent and irritating. Who is right?
I don't want every folder in it's own Window. This is an entirely different thing from what I am talking about (read the OP again). Yes, I know about this "feature" and it stinks, using this method of navigation you can end up with a dozen folders open very quickly. However, due to Windows's shortcomings (no view splitting) I do need to open multiple file manager windows frequently, and I would like to open the same directory in multiple windows to aid navigation. Entirely different things.
I see your point, but IMHO clicking on a folder means "open" not "display". When I open a folder from the File menu it says it right there, Open, which is what I think it should do, even if I already have that folder opened somewhere else. Of course, this is just MHO.
(for me multiple copies are a hazzle since when I have 10+ windows open the paths can no longer be seen when they're minimized to Kicker)
I don't really have this problem on KDE. With multiple desktops (I only have apps on that desktop display in the taskbar) and tabs in my shell (Konsole), file manager (Konqueror), and browser (Mozilla) I usually have no problem finding stuff in my taskbar. In Windows the taskbar is always crowded, which is probably why they developed this mis-feature in the first place.
Konqueror has the "Duplicate Window" (Ctrl+D) feature in the Location menu. I don't remember if Windows has a similar feature or not (it's been a while since I last used it) but in my opinion one good solution might be to bring the same window to front if you already have it open but open a duplicate through the menu.
Yes this would be a good solution, unfortunately Windows does not have this feature. Nor does it let you "open this folder in a new window" or any such thing. Basically, Konqueror is so much more featureful than the explorer file manager it's not even funny.
God, I hate that about Windows. If I ask my computer to open two windows of the same folder then it should do it! Windows assumes what I want and tries to second guess me (oh, you don't really want to open that folder again, do you?). KDE does what I tell it to do, which IMHO is what a computer should do. It is not the computers job to read my thoughts and try to figure out what I "really" mean.
Here's a situation where this particular "feature" annoys me. Since the default explorer file manager doesn't have view splitting it is necessary to have many folders open in order to drag and drop files. If I have "my documents" open and I'd like to drag something to a subfolder I'd like to open up a second copy of "my documents", navigate to the subfolder, and drag my files. Windows won't do this, I have to navigate away from "my documents" in order to open a new copy, which disrupts my workflow and is irritating. Of course, all of this is totally unnecessary in Konqueror, where view splitting and tabs make life so much more enjoyable.
Look again.
Operating System:
Microsoft Windows NT(R) Workstation 4.0, Windows NT Server 4.0 with Service Pack 6a or later, Windows 2000 Professional, Windows 2000 Server, Windows XP Professional, or Windows Server 2003
Not necessarily. The $200 billion spent on the war in Iraq is money which won't be spent on new programs and R&D. Defense contractors benefit the most when things are tense, but no actual fighting is going on. The Cold War years were good to defense contractor.
Of course /. is biased. If you want an unbiased source of news go read |.
Umm, no. AFAIK there was no way for Shakespeare to prevent other acting troupes from performing his plays, in fact this was a fairly common occurence. BTW, Shakespeare did not support himself by writing plays, he supported himself by acting out the plays he wrote. Sorry, can't really comment on Mozart, but it's pretty likely his works were performed all over Europe without his permission.
The design of the USAF and USN versions are not being compromised for the STOVL version. The other versions won't even have a lift fan, or anything related to the STOVL aspect. Further, the STOVL version is a relatively small piece of the program, only about 300 or so will be bought by the Marines. In contrast, several thousand of the conventionl version will be bought by the USAF, with a similar number for the Navy version. There are uses for jump jets, for example for taking off and landing in places where you don't have a runway. However, as you can see by the purchase numbers in no way are STOVL aircraft going to replace conventional ones.
I have no idea what you think is so bad about the lift fan design, what "enourmous mechanical stresses" are you talking about which aren't present in a traditional STOVL aircraft? Harriers and the Boeing JSF entry both create lift with exhust nozzles from the engine. This design is on the ragged edge of stability, it barely creates enough lift to lift the aircraft and has the inherrent danger that if the engine inhales its own exhaust it can stall, which is a very bad thing when you're trying to take off or land! The lift fan is a revolutionary design which creates a cushion of cooler air below the aircraft, eliminating the intake threat and has an excess of lift capacity. The initial test was amazing, the plane literally shot up 20 feet! The design has won numerous awards as well, you are the first I have heard to disparage it.
What are the options for video teleconferencing between Windows and Linux? I use Linux at home, but my parents two states away are Windows users. We've been trying to use Gnomemeeting/Netmeeting for several months now with mixed sucess. It seems that most of the problems seem to be on the Netmeeting end, but with Microsoft retiring Netmeeting there's little hope to get this resolved and Netmeeting doesn't appear to be a viable choice for the future. Are there any other options out there?
There's probably little money to be made in desktop Linux, but there's plenty to be saved. The adoption will come first on the corporate desktop, where you can roll out thousands of identical boxes and there are trained people to support them. Linux is just as easy to use as Windows, it's more difficult to administer if you have no idea what you're doing, but easier if you do. Corporate users typically don't install any hardware, another area where Linux is typically weaker than Windows. Corporate users typically don't even install software, leaving this to the support personnel as well. The savings of switching to Linux are substantial, and will become very attractive to corporate users soon. Extensive home use will follow wide corporate use. However, this will happen slowly due to MS's huge installed base. Plus, MS won't sit idly by and let this happen, they will fight it with all their considerable resources. Should be interesting to watch!
No, aluminum is still frequently anodized. Is it even possible to powder coat aluminum? AFAIK powder coating is for steels and such.
Wow, you got a +4 informative just for admitting you were wrong! Just goes to show how unusual that is, especially on /. ;)
Can you show me evidence that Microsoft has ever disabled someone's computer for failure to upgrade?
The parent is refering to XP product activation. If you change too much stuff in your machine, or try to move the install to a new machine Windows will lock you out until you call Microsoft to reactivate.