The parent shouldn't have been modded a troll. The comments on Apple's own past behavior, the hype surrounding some of Apple's product lines, and attempts to dominate markets using proprietary formats like QuickTime are all fair game.
Add to that several attempts to control every aspect of computing on the Apple platform to include software development.
I'm reading an interesting article that discusses how Windows 1.0 was and Windows 286 were forced into being awkward and clumsy due to legal challenges by Apple. Sadly, the article lacks any reference to Gates taking Apple code with he started working on Windows.
I recently noticed that Microsoft is going to license ClearType and the FAT filesystem. Apparently, MS is tired of everybody using FAT. Maybe it's been discussed on/. already, but this can either mean third-party software to bring ClearType to other platforms including Win2K and Linux, or it can mean no FAT support in Linux -- maybe it'll mean both
I don't have the links, but I read several posts by Mac users in other forums who have argued that Quartz under MacOS X is better than ClearType since Quartz more accurately renders text on screen as it would appear in print. Of course, some of the posts were just the typical Mac elitism, but some even said the anti-aliasing unde r Linux was better. Maybe they were talking about GNOME???
I wasn't sure whether GNOME was using sub-pixel rendering or straight anti-aliasing. I do remember liking the way text was rendered under GNOME though. Is there a way to add GNOME's anti-aliasing to old applications like rxvt and xv or WindowMaker and fvwm, or is this an impossibility since none of these apps are built using GNOME in the first place?
He added that users will only see two to three ads a day.
Two or three adds from one particular location maybe. This would still amount to several ads an hour. It's like when we were all in grade school and our teachers proudly said that they believed they should give each student 1 hour of homework each night, the problem being you had six other teachers who thought the same way. If it's true I'd only get a few ads a day, how will this be profitable for the ad company and partner? Oh, wait... it'll be profitable because it will be an additional advertising channel on top of already existing channels!
"Zango's all about keeping the Internet free," he added. Exactly what about the Internet is free? I pay for my Internet access. No amount of ads I view will make the Internet free for a user, and Web content is never free. Someone is always paying for it.
I meant to add this earlier, but I realize I was pretty snippy to you in my initial response so I do apologize. Your comment just really rubbed me the wrong way.
I can deal with the licensing systems that lock to the MAC address of your NIC (like FlexLM).
I had some exposure to FlexLM in the past, and most of the uses seem to be on CAD related applications like AutoCAD and 3D Studio - none of which I use. Will you run into problems with FlexLM if you go wireless or upgrade your NIC?
I love Windows XP. If you really optimize it by shutting down all those extra services, XP can be fast and stable system. I had far more crashes on Windows 2000 than XP, but that might have been a result of the evolutionary differences between Windows NT/95 and 2000.
I'm at the point now where I am questioning the need to upgrade just because the other lemmings will, and that's probably the first step towards Enlightenment - literally and figuratively.
Eh, I'm off-topic. You're off-topic. This whole forum is off-topic!
If you want TV and DVD on a nice Linux box, grab a Haupauge and a nice non-NVidia card.
This is something that worries me. I want the freedom to choose my hardware. I use a USB TV tuner not made by Hauppauge. There aren't many options out there for laptop users when it comes to video. Hauppauge is notorious for its poor support, even on the Windows platform. In order to watch TV or a DVD on Linux (which I had planned to do), I have to buy new hardware from a company I'd rather not support. There is a project to get my PCTV Deluxe USB working under Linux, but I'm not at the point of trying it out yet. I have an intergrated NVidia video adapter, a slew of DVDs, and 54% of a Linux iso downloaded:(
Incidently, I thought NVidia was a Linux favorite since the company does a good job of supporting Linux with optimized drivers, while ATI has always been lackluster in supporting Linux? In doing some research, I had learned that NVidia was my best bet for gaming under Linux.
Might be a good transitional tool for Windows users looking not wanting to give up their eye-candy interface initially.
I'm not sure that's the salient issue. Windows user who are savvy to Linux know about the great eye candy that is available for Linux.
Frankly, if it came down to eye candy, projects like Enlightenment offer no advantage over ObjectDesktop,
WindowsBlinds, and StyleXP.
And so far, Microsoft's ClearType anti-aliasing technology is subjectively better than
anything I've seen on MacOS or Linux. Note, this is an admittedly subjective evaluation. I found a Q&A that speaks to the technical quality of ClearType that is beyond my comprehension. The fact is, my eyes have never been happier! I work heavily with numbers and text. Show me how to anti-alias old Linux apps like xv and rxvt, and I'm yours!
As a longtime Windows user who does appreciate Linux, what keeps me from making the switch are three common issues that I and the thousands of Linux advocates
and zealots still haven't resolved:
1. I, like most Windows users, spend a lot on Windows software. Windows software typically costs about $40-80 online or in stores. That's quite an investment.
In order to let go of Windows I would have to write off my investment in software as a sunk cost. But what if I want to keep using that software?
What do I do, toss it out? Maybe I should sell it all off on eBay? This is why Linux is an easier sell to first time computer users; there isn't an established dependency.
There is a good amount of good software that doesn't run on WINE or any of the WINE spinoffs. Testing to see if my apps will work under Linux can require that
I pay good money for Win4Lin or VMWare. WINEX is a gamble since I have to pay before I can try it out, and according to the site, none of what I run works!
2. I like my a Windows apps. I don't abandon my apps just because there's a new operating system in town. I still use a few DOS and Windows 3.1 apps. I also have
MacOS and Amiga apps sitting around. Why should I abandon my favorite apps like MS Office XP or The Sims (I've bought all the expansions) just because there are
shiny new alternatives available on Linux? At the end of the day, I bought my computer in order to compute, not so that I can fight a revolution. Being a Stallmanista
is kinda cool too, but I want to use what I want to use... ultimately isn't Linux and open-source about freedom of choice?
3. I need to use specialized proprietary applications like SPSS, and I happen to use some hardware that isn't support under anything but Windows. For some apps, I just can't
use an alternative. And for the hardware, I'm not talking about winmodems, I''m talking about video capture devices and software that rely on the current DirectX and DirectShow.
It doesn't matter whether an alternative exists, I won't use it for reasons other than stubborness.
So far, the only solution has been dual-booting, which has its own problems, and purchasing a second computer.
So you're ignoring the general tone of the other posts that forked out from that original parent? Excuse me for not replying directly beneath a specific post in order to make things more readable for you.
As to the potential abuse by government, I thought I was pretty clear in suggesting that the government can use this (and other existing technologies) for monitoring people.
As for the neighbors, I never suggested they couldn't use binoculars. Again, I was addressing the larger issue of one being monitored by another using technologies, and how digital technologies make it easier.
You may believe anyone has the right to film you in public using any technology whatsoever, and so that's your personal take, but there any many people have legitimate concerns over being filmed for the pleasure of another person in secret or being monitored by the authorities. I believe I already indicated that I don't mind being filmed myself, but that I do mind if photos of me are used by someone to earn a buck on some girlwatching website. Is that sooo unreasonable? I think not.
Wow. This is getting to be a great thread on Macs. I'm really learning a lot of things about the Mac experience that I could never learn elsewhere without getting into Windows vs. * flame war:)
Often times, commercial programs would blatantly disregard Apple's filesystem guidelines.
Does Apple or the userbase do anything in retaliation to this? In the Windows world, we have choice since there's a larger array of apps. We can always vote with our dollars (unless of course, we're dealing with Microsoft). I'd personally be pissed if a software publisher regularly did things that might destabilize my system.
Let me ask you this. At the moment I'm using MacOS 7.5.5 on a classic machine. If I wanted to seriously go to Mac, is it worth it to use OS X, or should I go with 8.6 in order to get that classic Mac design? Hell, maybe I can emulate both under Linux if I try:) It sounds like you'd rather be running the earlier versions. In my world, there are many people still using DOS and Windows happily!
Everyone I know who was into the Macintosh were strictly users with little idea of knowing how the software worked and no inclination to learn how to write their own software. Everyone with an interest in writing software were using other computers and operating systems.
I can second that as well as the parent. I've only met a few people who had any interest in developing software on the Mac, several people who were interested in developing multimedia on the Mac, and countless many people who just want a computer that worked like an appliance.
I think another factor worth mentioning is gaming. I seem to recall Apple discouraging people from developing game software for a while since Apple wanted the Mac to be respected in the work environment, hence a lot of more science and educational apps. So, DOS ended up being the game platform, which worked out quite well since DOS developers had many more potential customers.
I still want an Apple. I've wanted one for years, but I'm locked in, and I still see Apple as "benevolent dictator" that go back to the way it was when Steve really got overbearing.
I've always been curious about installers. I don't understand why they have to be complicated or why uninstalling should be such a problem. Providing the user doesn't move things around after the install, why can't the install app or script work in reverse to cleanly remove an app? Some Windows apps such as the newsreader Forte Agent, and the IRC client called mIRC use a simple installer to basically unpack files into a directory of the user's choosing. Later if I want to run multiple instances of these apps, or just relocate them to another partition or directory structure, I can simply drag them. I needn't worry about DLLs getting lost or registy/ini settings getting screwed up. I wish all Windows apps could be like this. But it seems like the larger and more complex a Windows app is the more likely it will have a complicated installer - or am I confused by what an installer actually is?
Besides, Mac-style drag-and-drop installs have their own problems: they don't get updated properly and they don't verify or deal with dependencies on install; they just dump the mess into the user's lap.
It probably leads to having multiple or redundant versions of the same library installed in several isolated locations needlessly sucking up space. Is there an app that Mac users use to deal with this, like some sort of library utility that scans a drive and pulls up a list of every library installed, including version information?
You're being misleading! The fact is, I as a Windows user don't even need to save a virus to disk and run it in order to get infected.:P
So UNIX users are actually three steps removed from dangerous attachments, but seriously will KDE and GNOME eventually bring in traditionally Windows specific security issues inadvertantly by trying to mimic the Windows environment?
I for one am not going to push for Longhorn. Longhorn is going to be an evolutionary change over what Windows has been according to Microsoft. I may need to look elsewhere if Windows XP will be my last Windows OS for years to come. I can't go Apple since I've invested a lot in PC hardware and software. With Longhorn, I'll have to deal with the possibility of some or all of my important apps breaking under the new Windows. Plus, I have to deal with Microsoft's new vision of security and digital rights management.
Mod me offtopic... Windows and Windows software is insulting. No, it doesn't suck. It's very good, but it's insulting. UNIX is the same way. It used to be I could just pop in my software, install it, and begin operating it. At most I'd have to supply a serial number. Fine.
But now, the act of purchasing, installing, or using Windows software forces me to put up with accusations of fraud and theft. Please comment if the following list of insulting behavior is incomplete:
Diskettes that eat themselves after a specific number of installs or that hard-code user registration info onto the original distribution media
CDROMs that are encrypted, preventing me from making legitimate backups
Software that won't load unless I have a security dongle, a special diskette, or the original CDROM
Software that requires
activation
Software that secret connects to servers behind my back
Software that requires me to allow it to connect to a home server to verify my serial number on each use
Software that locks itself down to my hardware
Software that installs secret files to prevent me from reinstalling it without a format -> Fuck you, VBOX!
Software that tries to verify my ownership each time I update it
It's reasonable that software publishers want to curb piracy, and I know that these methods can be effective at preventing regular people like me from stealing. But Windows users have come to accept this presumption that we are criminals trying to take advantage of some poor software publisher; that we are not to be trusted; that we should be prevented from doing anything bad with our computers. Maybe some of us are, but I don't like being put in an adversarial position vis-a-vis my software and my computer. Essentially I have to provide picture ID everytime I want to do something new on my computer - and as a hobbyist, I enjoy doing new things. All I ask for is that Microsoft trust me and show me respect as a registered user who has owned every version of Windows and Windows NT since 1.0. I also ask the same of other other software companies too.
Imagine if restaurants behaved the way software companies did everytime we wanted food.
Here's where I believe the true benefit of Linux and FreeBSD comes into play. Open Source advocates talk proudly about freedom, but I haven't heard anyone address dignity attacks Windows users regularly submit to. When I install Linux, I know that, with a few exceptions, I won't have to deal with the issues I listed above. I know there are no real deep pockets in the Linux business, but someday I would like to see a national advertisement for Linux aimed at desktop users where the central point driven home is that personal computer users can gain back that dignity they lost over the last 15 years. Flame away.
Yeah, real insightful, Einstein. How about reading the fucking thread before you jump right in like an ass? I didn't start this with a rant, nor did I make a connection between the issues I raised and the technology itself. There are several posts that occurred before mine wherein posters discuss relevant privacy implications, and I responded to one of the posts with an example resulting from the misuse of this technology.
For me this particular tech isn't an issue; it's the larger body of technologies available that has many women (and men) worried. You and your gym bag can go easily unnoticed, but I can't imagine a guy with a camera mounted to his glasses could also.
Also, there are people out there who aren't aware about how small cameras can be. We've all seen those mini-spy cams that are built into hats or glases worn by undercover cop and reporters
When I look at our case, I think anyone who has a rational mind would come down to the same conclusions I do.
So McBride says that we are all irrational because we do not agree with his side. Traditionally, legal disputes are fought with the admittance that each side is rational - a sort of gentlemen's approach to the fight. Of course, often legal proceedings come down to screaming that the other side is wrong because he's just crazy.
The article mentions SCO's opinions on the GPL, so it may come off redundant that I mention this here, especially since Slashdot rejected it when I submitted it days ago:
SCO's website lists five reasons for choosing SCO over its competitors. The fifth reason; that SCO UNIX is legally unencumbered, contains some inflamatory statements that hint at litigious behavior to come. In an open letter from Darl McBride, SCO has stated that the GPL license violates the US Constitution and current US Copyright and patent laws. From a legal perspective, it seems that SCO is gearing up for a floodgates argument (the weakest kind) that even if Linux doesn't contain SCO code, the GPL license itself is void such that no software can be distributed under the terms of the GPL. This would leave an opening for SCO to attempt to claim ownership of Linux technologies that have not been implicated in SCO's original lawsuit.
"SCO asserts that the GPL, under which Linux is distributed, violates the United States Constitution and the U.S. copyright and patent laws. . .." "Based on the views of the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court, we believe that adoption and use of the GPL by significant parts of the software industry was a mistake. The positions of the Free Software Foundation and Red Hat against proprietary software are ill-founded and are contrary to our system of copyright and patent laws. We believe that responsible corporations throughout the IT industry have advocated use of the GPL without full analysis of its long-term detriment to our economy. We are confident that these corporations will ultimately reverse support for the GPL, and will pursue a more responsible direction.
In the meantime, the U.S. Congress has authorized legal action against copyright violators under the Copyright Act and its most recent amendment, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. SCO intends to fully protect its rights granted under these Acts against all who would use and distribute our intellectual property for free, and would strip out copyright management information from our proprietary code, use it in Linux, and distribute it under the GPL. "
Now, McBride is essentially arguing that the Court will find that it is morally wrong for people to develop free software, or software for free since profit is the engine that blah blah blah:
We do so knowing that the voices of thousands of open source developers who believe 'software should be free' cannot prevail against the U.S. Congress and voices of seven U.S. Supreme Court justices who believe that 'the motive of profit is the engine that ensures the progress of science,'" McBride said.
Okay, admit it guys, if there was ever one company you wish Microsoft would just up and swallow, it's this one!
Anti-trust is designed to level the playing field - that is it's very core purpose - it's definition.
That Microsoft is an illegal trust is not a new concept. The government has fought Microsoft and won many times before... and yet the obvious result, in accordance to the definition obviously has not occured; otherwise people would not bitch and moan so much about how Microsoft still illegally dominates the market. Anti-trust proceedings did put an end to AT&T's bad behavior, but it has done nothing to Microsoft.
The government is not trying to put Microsoft out of business; they want a healthy market (or at least I hope they do) which everyone benefits from.
That was my point. The government does have a clear preference for Microsoft to stay on top however. Just considerings things mathematically, a single corporate giant can produce greater profits and employment than several small moderately successful mom-and-pop software shops. At the same time, the government wants the market to do all the work for it, so a market with no competition is undesirable. But there are those out there who unreasonably expect the government to kill the giant and parade its bloddy carcas through the streets.
For fuck's sake, anti-aliasing is very much a tech issue. No all of us wear glasses. Those of us who don't would like to avoid needing to in the future. When you spent hours late at night, everynight, reading reports and calculating figures, anti-aliasing makes it possible to get by without a bottle of eye drops and an Advil. Human interface design is a science, not a cutesy artform with the sole goal of producing 3D icons and splash screens.
Windows is being institutionalized
on
Why PHBs Fear Linux
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Illinois Institute of Technology has a business school that offers an Information Systems program. I'd figure that there would be some synergies between the geek-side and the white-collar drone side of the school. I was wrong.
The textbooks rarely mentioned UNIX or VMS unless it was during a discussion of ancient legacy database or EDI systems or a treatise on the history of client-server computing. There were courses that were specifically slanted toward certain products like Visual Basic, and ASP, with no mention of Delphi or PHP. Database discussions and case studies involving databases were always about Oracle or Microsoft products. There was never a mention of MySQL or PostgreSQL. Linux only came up because my boyfriend is an advocate. We'd discuss equivalent Linux technologies with professors. Those professors who were interested only felt that it wasn't worth it to try to teach those technologies to students since the students want to learn these sexy enterprise computing acronyms like ASP and.NET.
To make things worse, the entire school network had been rebuilt using all Microsoft technologies on the front end and a couple of IRIX or SunOS systems on the back far away from prying eyes. The result was a complete divorcing of UNIX from all aspects of computing among the student body with the effect of new students not being exposed to anything but Microsoft Windows (including thin clients). This bothers me a lot since I feel my UNIX and VAX experience has helped shaped my understanding of computing more than what Windows has done.
There is a perception of UNIX and Linux being institutionalized in the university system. UNIX is what was whereas Windows is what will be. Linux is for local chapter ACM members who have long hair and date ugly girls. Windows is for businessmen who drive luxury cars and get blowjobs from beautiful women they hardly know. UNIX is a typewriter in the age of Microsoft Office. UNIX is that mysterious blue box (SGI Indy) sitting in a basement office serving the school's webmail system, and the VAX is a hobbled workhorse that's being put out of its misery as I type.
*Bang* Hear that? That was the sound of six years worth of my emails being erased forever as a VAX completes its last process.
Where are you from? I didn't know of anyone outside of South Dakota, who even knows about Janklow.
I think the reason most outside of SD know of Kanklow is that he made network and cable news with his case. The guy has always admitted that he likes to drive fast, and that he couldn't help himself.
The sound of "I can't drive 55" playing in the background.
I'm not sure I agree with the government's attack on Microsoft. I like MS products these days, and I'm not blind to anything MS has done, but I cannot make the connection between anti-trust suits against Microsoft and a better playing field for MS' competitiors. The reason is, is that in between the two is the government which benefits both from suing Microsoft and from helping Microsoft stay on top. Oh, fuck it, I'm just jaded.
If it's just recording it to some internal storage drive, and then you move the footage to your hard drive or somewhere else, then what's the problem?
That's precisely the problem. I don't know about the quality of the photos this camera can produce. I'm thinking the resolution will be lower than what you could achieve with a regular digital camera due to the automated nature of the camera and its limited storage space, but that's irrelevent. The fact is, a photo can be taken of a person without that person's consent or knowledge.
There are a lot of girl-watching hobbyists out there who have been aided by digital cameras and camera-cell phone combos. Some upload the images to newsgroups or to commercial sites catering in upskirt candids. I've had my photo taken by complete strangers on the streets, the beach, and in nightclubs. I personally don't mind some guy "enjoying" a photo of me in the privacy of his own home, but it's reasonable that other women would have a problem. My privacy concerns are with the photo being uploaded to a public site without my knowledge or permission, especially if said site had a sexual or voyeuristic tone. My biggest privacy concern however is with abuses of the technology by law enforcement agencies and the government, or just nosy neighbors who enjoy spying on others. There is also the possibility that the photographer has a more nefarious scheme; that I'm intended to be more than a pretty face and nice legs for one's personal candid delight. The point is, I'd have no idea what the photographer's intentions were, nor would I even know I was being filmed or spied on.
Reading your passionate argument here, I'm getting that you see software selection (or any product selection for that matter) as an extension of the social contract, and that we should reward those individuals who make positive contributions by patronizing their art while shunning those individuals (or companies) that have a legacy of hurting society. This is kind of a Kant vs. Mills situation here because even though Microsoft Office provides the greatest aggregate happiness to the most people, Microsoft has a history of stifling innovation in personal computing to the detriment of consumers.
If that's the gist of your point, then I can appreciate it; but it may not be fair to say that proprietary software is always a socially damaging thing. It sounds as if that's what you're doing. There are instances where proprietary software has actually delivered a social benefit. Games are a good example, most of the successful and most entertainment games have been proprietary. One may be tempted to argue that gaming isn't all that important as compared to other types of computing; however to that I retort: the desire to seek entertainment is a key indicator of high-order intelligence in an animal, and is therefore very important. We should also consider the myriad of closed-source applications during the 80s that helped develop the personal computing community during the age of high-end and highly litigious UNIX vendors.
But we really need a nice office suite, sure there's MS Office, and I prefer it to the Windows version for several reasons, but there is no choice here. Everything except for MS Office is a half-finished non-full featured also-ran and that's a sad state of affairs.
How is WordPerfect on the Mac these days? I am using Windows XP with Office XP. I loved Word Perfect but these last few versions since Corel has taken control have not thrilled me. It seems like someone needs to start building a coffin for Corel. I hear the new Office XP is great though I haven't tried it yet. Is there a technical reason for Mac users not to like it, or is it just the fact that it's a Microsoft product?
Slashdot Mirror
The parent shouldn't have been modded a troll. The comments on Apple's own past behavior, the hype surrounding some of Apple's product lines, and attempts to dominate markets using proprietary formats like QuickTime are all fair game.
Add to that several attempts to control every aspect of computing on the Apple platform to include software development.
I'm reading an interesting article that discusses how Windows 1.0 was and Windows 286 were forced into being awkward and clumsy due to legal challenges by Apple. Sadly, the article lacks any reference to Gates taking Apple code with he started working on Windows.
I recently noticed that Microsoft is going to license ClearType and the FAT filesystem. Apparently, MS is tired of everybody using FAT. Maybe it's been discussed on /. already, but this can either mean third-party software to bring ClearType to other platforms including Win2K and Linux, or it can mean no FAT support in Linux -- maybe it'll mean both
Microsoft Opens Up Licensing
Microsoft Plays Intellectual Property Licensing Catch-Up
ClearType Technology and Patent License
Microsoft unveils new intellectual property policy
I don't have the links, but I read several posts by Mac users in other forums who have argued that Quartz under MacOS X is better than ClearType since Quartz more accurately renders text on screen as it would appear in print. Of course, some of the posts were just the typical Mac elitism, but some even said the anti-aliasing unde r Linux was better. Maybe they were talking about GNOME???
I wasn't sure whether GNOME was using sub-pixel rendering or straight anti-aliasing. I do remember liking the way text was rendered under GNOME though. Is there a way to add GNOME's anti-aliasing to old applications like rxvt and xv or WindowMaker and fvwm, or is this an impossibility since none of these apps are built using GNOME in the first place?
He added that users will only see two to three ads a day.
Two or three adds from one particular location maybe. This would still amount to several ads an hour. It's like when we were all in grade school and our teachers proudly said that they believed they should give each student 1 hour of homework each night, the problem being you had six other teachers who thought the same way. If it's true I'd only get a few ads a day, how will this be profitable for the ad company and partner? Oh, wait... it'll be profitable because it will be an additional advertising channel on top of already existing channels!
"Zango's all about keeping the Internet free," he added.
Exactly what about the Internet is free? I pay for my Internet access. No amount of ads I view will make the Internet free for a user, and Web content is never free. Someone is always paying for it.
I meant to add this earlier, but I realize I was pretty snippy to you in my initial response so I do apologize. Your comment just really rubbed me the wrong way.
I can deal with the licensing systems that lock to the MAC address of your NIC (like FlexLM).
I had some exposure to FlexLM in the past, and most of the uses seem to be on CAD related applications like AutoCAD and 3D Studio - none of which I use. Will you run into problems with FlexLM if you go wireless or upgrade your NIC?
I love Windows XP. If you really optimize it by shutting down all those extra services, XP can be fast and stable system. I had far more crashes on Windows 2000 than XP, but that might have been a result of the evolutionary differences between Windows NT/95 and 2000.
I'm at the point now where I am questioning the need to upgrade just because the other lemmings will, and that's probably the first step towards Enlightenment - literally and figuratively.
Eh, I'm off-topic. You're off-topic. This whole forum is off-topic!
:(
If you want TV and DVD on a nice Linux box, grab a Haupauge and a nice non-NVidia card.
This is something that worries me. I want the freedom to choose my hardware. I use a USB TV tuner not made by Hauppauge. There aren't many options out there for laptop users when it comes to video. Hauppauge is notorious for its poor support, even on the Windows platform. In order to watch TV or a DVD on Linux (which I had planned to do), I have to buy new hardware from a company I'd rather not support. There is a project to get my PCTV Deluxe USB working under Linux, but I'm not at the point of trying it out yet. I have an intergrated NVidia video adapter, a slew of DVDs, and 54% of a Linux iso downloaded
Incidently, I thought NVidia was a Linux favorite since the company does a good job of supporting Linux with optimized drivers, while ATI has always been lackluster in supporting Linux? In doing some research, I had learned that NVidia was my best bet for gaming under Linux.
Might be a good transitional tool for Windows users looking not wanting to give up their eye-candy interface initially.
I'm not sure that's the salient issue. Windows user who are savvy to Linux know about the great eye candy that is available for Linux. Frankly, if it came down to eye candy, projects like Enlightenment offer no advantage over ObjectDesktop, WindowsBlinds, and StyleXP. And so far, Microsoft's ClearType anti-aliasing technology is subjectively better than anything I've seen on MacOS or Linux. Note, this is an admittedly subjective evaluation. I found a Q&A that speaks to the technical quality of ClearType that is beyond my comprehension. The fact is, my eyes have never been happier! I work heavily with numbers and text. Show me how to anti-alias old Linux apps like xv and rxvt, and I'm yours!
As a longtime Windows user who does appreciate Linux, what keeps me from making the switch are three common issues that I and the thousands of Linux advocates and zealots still haven't resolved:
1. I, like most Windows users, spend a lot on Windows software. Windows software typically costs about $40-80 online or in stores. That's quite an investment. In order to let go of Windows I would have to write off my investment in software as a sunk cost. But what if I want to keep using that software? What do I do, toss it out? Maybe I should sell it all off on eBay? This is why Linux is an easier sell to first time computer users; there isn't an established dependency. There is a good amount of good software that doesn't run on WINE or any of the WINE spinoffs. Testing to see if my apps will work under Linux can require that I pay good money for Win4Lin or VMWare. WINEX is a gamble since I have to pay before I can try it out, and according to the site, none of what I run works!
2. I like my a Windows apps. I don't abandon my apps just because there's a new operating system in town. I still use a few DOS and Windows 3.1 apps. I also have MacOS and Amiga apps sitting around. Why should I abandon my favorite apps like MS Office XP or The Sims (I've bought all the expansions) just because there are shiny new alternatives available on Linux? At the end of the day, I bought my computer in order to compute, not so that I can fight a revolution. Being a Stallmanista is kinda cool too, but I want to use what I want to use... ultimately isn't Linux and open-source about freedom of choice?
3. I need to use specialized proprietary applications like SPSS, and I happen to use some hardware that isn't support under anything but Windows. For some apps, I just can't use an alternative. And for the hardware, I'm not talking about winmodems, I''m talking about video capture devices and software that rely on the current DirectX and DirectShow. It doesn't matter whether an alternative exists, I won't use it for reasons other than stubborness.
So far, the only solution has been dual-booting, which has its own problems, and purchasing a second computer.
So you're ignoring the general tone of the other posts that forked out from that original parent? Excuse me for not replying directly beneath a specific post in order to make things more readable for you.
As to the potential abuse by government, I thought I was pretty clear in suggesting that the government can use this (and other existing technologies) for monitoring people.
As for the neighbors, I never suggested they couldn't use binoculars. Again, I was addressing the larger issue of one being monitored by another using technologies, and how digital technologies make it easier.
You may believe anyone has the right to film you in public using any technology whatsoever, and so that's your personal take, but there any many people have legitimate concerns over being filmed for the pleasure of another person in secret or being monitored by the authorities. I believe I already indicated that I don't mind being filmed myself, but that I do mind if photos of me are used by someone to earn a buck on some girlwatching website. Is that sooo unreasonable? I think not.
Wow. This is getting to be a great thread on Macs. I'm really learning a lot of things about the Mac experience that I could never learn elsewhere without getting into Windows vs. * flame war :)
:) It sounds like you'd rather be running the earlier versions. In my world, there are many people still using DOS and Windows happily!
Often times, commercial programs would blatantly disregard Apple's filesystem guidelines.
Does Apple or the userbase do anything in retaliation to this? In the Windows world, we have choice since there's a larger array of apps. We can always vote with our dollars (unless of course, we're dealing with Microsoft). I'd personally be pissed if a software publisher regularly did things that might destabilize my system.
Let me ask you this. At the moment I'm using MacOS 7.5.5 on a classic machine. If I wanted to seriously go to Mac, is it worth it to use OS X, or should I go with 8.6 in order to get that classic Mac design? Hell, maybe I can emulate both under Linux if I try
Everyone I know who was into the Macintosh were strictly users with little idea of knowing how the software worked and no inclination to learn how to write their own software. Everyone with an interest in writing software were using other computers and operating systems.
I can second that as well as the parent. I've only met a few people who had any interest in developing software on the Mac, several people who were interested in developing multimedia on the Mac, and countless many people who just want a computer that worked like an appliance.
I think another factor worth mentioning is gaming. I seem to recall Apple discouraging people from developing game software for a while since Apple wanted the Mac to be respected in the work environment, hence a lot of more science and educational apps. So, DOS ended up being the game platform, which worked out quite well since DOS developers had many more potential customers.
I still want an Apple. I've wanted one for years, but I'm locked in, and I still see Apple as "benevolent dictator" that go back to the way it was when Steve really got overbearing.
I've always been curious about installers. I don't understand why they have to be complicated or why uninstalling should be such a problem. Providing the user doesn't move things around after the install, why can't the install app or script work in reverse to cleanly remove an app? Some Windows apps such as the newsreader Forte Agent, and the IRC client called mIRC use a simple installer to basically unpack files into a directory of the user's choosing. Later if I want to run multiple instances of these apps, or just relocate them to another partition or directory structure, I can simply drag them. I needn't worry about DLLs getting lost or registy/ini settings getting screwed up. I wish all Windows apps could be like this. But it seems like the larger and more complex a Windows app is the more likely it will have a complicated installer - or am I confused by what an installer actually is?
Besides, Mac-style drag-and-drop installs have their own problems: they don't get updated properly and they don't verify or deal with dependencies on install; they just dump the mess into the user's lap.
It probably leads to having multiple or redundant versions of the same library installed in several isolated locations needlessly sucking up space. Is there an app that Mac users use to deal with this, like some sort of library utility that scans a drive and pulls up a list of every library installed, including version information?
You're being misleading! The fact is, I as a Windows user don't even need to save a virus to disk and run it in order to get infected. :P
So UNIX users are actually three steps removed from dangerous attachments, but seriously will KDE and GNOME eventually bring in traditionally Windows specific security issues inadvertantly by trying to mimic the Windows environment?
Mod me offtopic... Windows and Windows software is insulting. No, it doesn't suck. It's very good, but it's insulting. UNIX is the same way. It used to be I could just pop in my software, install it, and begin operating it. At most I'd have to supply a serial number. Fine.
But now, the act of purchasing, installing, or using Windows software forces me to put up with accusations of fraud and theft. Please comment if the following list of insulting behavior is incomplete:
It's reasonable that software publishers want to curb piracy, and I know that these methods can be effective at preventing regular people like me from stealing. But Windows users have come to accept this presumption that we are criminals trying to take advantage of some poor software publisher; that we are not to be trusted; that we should be prevented from doing anything bad with our computers. Maybe some of us are, but I don't like being put in an adversarial position vis-a-vis my software and my computer. Essentially I have to provide picture ID everytime I want to do something new on my computer - and as a hobbyist, I enjoy doing new things. All I ask for is that Microsoft trust me and show me respect as a registered user who has owned every version of Windows and Windows NT since 1.0. I also ask the same of other other software companies too.
Imagine if restaurants behaved the way software companies did everytime we wanted food.
Here's where I believe the true benefit of Linux and FreeBSD comes into play. Open Source advocates talk proudly about freedom, but I haven't heard anyone address dignity attacks Windows users regularly submit to. When I install Linux, I know that, with a few exceptions, I won't have to deal with the issues I listed above. I know there are no real deep pockets in the Linux business, but someday I would like to see a national advertisement for Linux aimed at desktop users where the central point driven home is that personal computer users can gain back that dignity they lost over the last 15 years. Flame away.
Yeah, real insightful, Einstein. How about reading the fucking thread before you jump right in like an ass? I didn't start this with a rant, nor did I make a connection between the issues I raised and the technology itself. There are several posts that occurred before mine wherein posters discuss relevant privacy implications, and I responded to one of the posts with an example resulting from the misuse of this technology.
For me this particular tech isn't an issue; it's the larger body of technologies available that has many women (and men) worried. You and your gym bag can go easily unnoticed, but I can't imagine a guy with a camera mounted to his glasses could also.
Also, there are people out there who aren't aware about how small cameras can be. We've all seen those mini-spy cams that are built into hats or glases worn by undercover cop and reporters
Sitting with my legs crossed under a long skirt and my back against the wall.
So McBride says that we are all irrational because we do not agree with his side. Traditionally, legal disputes are fought with the admittance that each side is rational - a sort of gentlemen's approach to the fight. Of course, often legal proceedings come down to screaming that the other side is wrong because he's just crazy.
The article mentions SCO's opinions on the GPL, so it may come off redundant that I mention this here, especially since Slashdot rejected it when I submitted it days ago:
SCO's website lists five reasons for choosing SCO over its competitors. The fifth reason; that SCO UNIX is legally unencumbered, contains some inflamatory statements that hint at litigious behavior to come. In an open letter from Darl McBride, SCO has stated that the GPL license violates the US Constitution and current US Copyright and patent laws. From a legal perspective, it seems that SCO is gearing up for a floodgates argument (the weakest kind) that even if Linux doesn't contain SCO code, the GPL license itself is void such that no software can be distributed under the terms of the GPL. This would leave an opening for SCO to attempt to claim ownership of Linux technologies that have not been implicated in SCO's original lawsuit.
Now, McBride is essentially arguing that the Court will find that it is morally wrong for people to develop free software, or software for free since profit is the engine that blah blah blah:
We do so knowing that the voices of thousands of open source developers who believe 'software should be free' cannot prevail against the U.S. Congress and voices of seven U.S. Supreme Court justices who believe that 'the motive of profit is the engine that ensures the progress of science,'" McBride said.
Okay, admit it guys, if there was ever one company you wish Microsoft would just up and swallow, it's this one!
Anti-trust is designed to level the playing field - that is it's very core purpose - it's definition.
That Microsoft is an illegal trust is not a new concept. The government has fought Microsoft and won many times before... and yet the obvious result, in accordance to the definition obviously has not occured; otherwise people would not bitch and moan so much about how Microsoft still illegally dominates the market. Anti-trust proceedings did put an end to AT&T's bad behavior, but it has done nothing to Microsoft.
The government is not trying to put Microsoft out of business; they want a healthy market (or at least I hope they do) which everyone benefits from.
That was my point. The government does have a clear preference for Microsoft to stay on top however. Just considerings things mathematically, a single corporate giant can produce greater profits and employment than several small moderately successful mom-and-pop software shops. At the same time, the government wants the market to do all the work for it, so a market with no competition is undesirable. But there are those out there who unreasonably expect the government to kill the giant and parade its bloddy carcas through the streets.
For fuck's sake, anti-aliasing is very much a tech issue. No all of us wear glasses. Those of us who don't would like to avoid needing to in the future. When you spent hours late at night, everynight, reading reports and calculating figures, anti-aliasing makes it possible to get by without a bottle of eye drops and an Advil. Human interface design is a science, not a cutesy artform with the sole goal of producing 3D icons and splash screens.
Illinois Institute of Technology has a business school that offers an Information Systems program. I'd figure that there would be some synergies between the geek-side and the white-collar drone side of the school. I was wrong.
.NET.
The textbooks rarely mentioned UNIX or VMS unless it was during a discussion of ancient legacy database or EDI systems or a treatise on the history of client-server computing. There were courses that were specifically slanted toward certain products like Visual Basic, and ASP, with no mention of Delphi or PHP. Database discussions and case studies involving databases were always about Oracle or Microsoft products. There was never a mention of MySQL or PostgreSQL. Linux only came up because my boyfriend is an advocate. We'd discuss equivalent Linux technologies with professors. Those professors who were interested only felt that it wasn't worth it to try to teach those technologies to students since the students want to learn these sexy enterprise computing acronyms like ASP and
To make things worse, the entire school network had been rebuilt using all Microsoft technologies on the front end and a couple of IRIX or SunOS systems on the back far away from prying eyes. The result was a complete divorcing of UNIX from all aspects of computing among the student body with the effect of new students not being exposed to anything but Microsoft Windows (including thin clients). This bothers me a lot since I feel my UNIX and VAX experience has helped shaped my understanding of computing more than what Windows has done.
There is a perception of UNIX and Linux being institutionalized in the university system. UNIX is what was whereas Windows is what will be. Linux is for local chapter ACM members who have long hair and date ugly girls. Windows is for businessmen who drive luxury cars and get blowjobs from beautiful women they hardly know. UNIX is a typewriter in the age of Microsoft Office. UNIX is that mysterious blue box (SGI Indy) sitting in a basement office serving the school's webmail system, and the VAX is a hobbled workhorse that's being put out of its misery as I type.
*Bang* Hear that? That was the sound of six years worth of my emails being erased forever as a VAX completes its last process.
Where are you from? I didn't know of anyone outside of South Dakota, who even knows about Janklow.
I think the reason most outside of SD know of Kanklow is that he made network and cable news with his case. The guy has always admitted that he likes to drive fast, and that he couldn't help himself.
The sound of "I can't drive 55" playing in the background.
I'm not sure I agree with the government's attack on Microsoft. I like MS products these days, and I'm not blind to anything MS has done, but I cannot make the connection between anti-trust suits against Microsoft and a better playing field for MS' competitiors. The reason is, is that in between the two is the government which benefits both from suing Microsoft and from helping Microsoft stay on top. Oh, fuck it, I'm just jaded.
If it's just recording it to some internal storage drive, and then you move the footage to your hard drive or somewhere else, then what's the problem?
That's precisely the problem. I don't know about the quality of the photos this camera can produce. I'm thinking the resolution will be lower than what you could achieve with a regular digital camera due to the automated nature of the camera and its limited storage space, but that's irrelevent. The fact is, a photo can be taken of a person without that person's consent or knowledge.
There are a lot of girl-watching hobbyists out there who have been aided by digital cameras and camera-cell phone combos. Some upload the images to newsgroups or to commercial sites catering in upskirt candids. I've had my photo taken by complete strangers on the streets, the beach, and in nightclubs. I personally don't mind some guy "enjoying" a photo of me in the privacy of his own home, but it's reasonable that other women would have a problem. My privacy concerns are with the photo being uploaded to a public site without my knowledge or permission, especially if said site had a sexual or voyeuristic tone. My biggest privacy concern however is with abuses of the technology by law enforcement agencies and the government, or just nosy neighbors who enjoy spying on others. There is also the possibility that the photographer has a more nefarious scheme; that I'm intended to be more than a pretty face and nice legs for one's personal candid delight. The point is, I'd have no idea what the photographer's intentions were, nor would I even know I was being filmed or spied on.
Reading your passionate argument here, I'm getting that you see software selection (or any product selection for that matter) as an extension of the social contract, and that we should reward those individuals who make positive contributions by patronizing their art while shunning those individuals (or companies) that have a legacy of hurting society. This is kind of a Kant vs. Mills situation here because even though Microsoft Office provides the greatest aggregate happiness to the most people, Microsoft has a history of stifling innovation in personal computing to the detriment of consumers.
If that's the gist of your point, then I can appreciate it; but it may not be fair to say that proprietary software is always a socially damaging thing. It sounds as if that's what you're doing. There are instances where proprietary software has actually delivered a social benefit. Games are a good example, most of the successful and most entertainment games have been proprietary. One may be tempted to argue that gaming isn't all that important as compared to other types of computing; however to that I retort: the desire to seek entertainment is a key indicator of high-order intelligence in an animal, and is therefore very important. We should also consider the myriad of closed-source applications during the 80s that helped develop the personal computing community during the age of high-end and highly litigious UNIX vendors.
But we really need a nice office suite, sure there's MS Office, and I prefer it to the Windows version for several reasons, but there is no choice here. Everything except for MS Office is a half-finished non-full featured also-ran and that's a sad state of affairs.
How is WordPerfect on the Mac these days? I am using Windows XP with Office XP. I loved Word Perfect but these last few versions since Corel has taken control have not thrilled me. It seems like someone needs to start building a coffin for Corel. I hear the new Office XP is great though I haven't tried it yet. Is there a technical reason for Mac users not to like it, or is it just the fact that it's a Microsoft product?
Flattery and a few bottles of vodka will get you everywhere!