You say that having to compile source code is 'retarded'; this is only true if you use an OS from a company like MS or Apple. Apple made sure that things would be easy because they control the architecture and refuse to port to other processors. MS doesn't quite have the same luxury, but Win9x only runs on Intel. Linux, OTOH, will run on PPC, x86, Alpha, MIPS, Sparc, m68k (Amigas, Ataris, Macs), ARM, and so on. Furthermore, there are different libraries and toolkits available that do similar things. There are plenty of hardware options as well. This is great, but there's a price: you can't just double-click a binary and go. First you'd have to choose the binary for your system (arch, libs, hardware combo).
As for MacOSX, I won't be using it (and I *am* a musician). Apple, as always, has taken a masterpiece (NeXTSTEP in this case) and completely screwed it up. They are using QuickTime (which is crap) instead of striking a deal with CCRMA and distributing the amazing MusicKit. They have created an absolutely unusable GUI (why couldn't they have left the NeXTSTEP interface alone? it was much better than the MacOS interface). They still have such an elitest "we know best" attitude. They decide what is best for the end-user.
I'll stick with Linux/GNUstep.
P.S. GNUstep is getting better by the minute. There has been some talk about a GNUstep distro complete with Installer.app and everything. It'd be nice to run on the Hurd too. Check it out sometime.
Compiling software is really a necessity though. Do you really think it would be easier for the user to browse through a list of 300,000 different binaries for every possible architecture/library/hardware combo and try to figure out which one he needs? It's much simpler for both the users and the developers if the source code is provided with an install script that will configure, compile, and install.
As for X, I agree. What is really needed is not simplicity; but rather direct, powerful, and straight-forward solutions. The best solution for every problem...
Re:While on the subject of X windows...
on
Fifteen Years of X
·
· Score: 2
Does anyone have any idea why my moving my PS2 mouse under linux would make a low (but noticable) buzzing sound on my speakers?
Kinda like a zipper sound? Usually a "dirty" graphics card. If you get out of X, make sure you unload gpm (so moving your mouse causes no change on your display), and then move your mouse, you should have no extra noises. If you get no zipping noises, it's likely to be the graphics card putting out tons of noise and your audio card not being sufficiently shielded.
The fact that it doesn't happen in Windows is a little puzzling. Perhaps the gain is turned down more in Windows? It could also be the driver. The driver can actually make a difference in the amount of interference you get.
How to fix it? If you think about it, there's quite a lot of RF and EM noise going on inside your computer and there's not a whole lot you can do but turn down the volume. As an extreme solution, you might consider looking up one of those projects to "wrap" your card in a kind of tinfoil shield. It's around the web somewhere. Of course, if you're that serious about clean recording you'll probably want to get a soundcard with digital I/O and a DAT to record on. Good luck.
100 meg? are you sure you aren't referring to disk space required? Bloat refers to the memory footprint and efficiency of the code (how elegant the architecture is and how cleanly things are done, for instance.)
The biggest problem with Windows, IMHO, is that they came up with an architecture and then ran with it. I don't know for sure, of course, but I highly suspect that they didn't throw away their first few attempts.
At any rate, X is a little dirty and bloated. One thing I desperately wish is that we could have direct access to the hardware if running the client and server on the same machine (by far, the most common situation) *without* breaking the very useful remote server capabilities. I do a good bit of graphical stuff (modeling and rendering) as well as real-time synthesis and it would be really nice to have a real OS (Linux) but have the direct hardware access (Windows). Execept, unlike Windows, it would be done cleanly and elegantly. I seem to remember hearing something about this functionality being added to X but don't know for sure.
Why not ban MS file formats altogether? I mean, if we are going to censor let's censor something that actually does damage: non-standard "standards." Certainly does a lot more damage than Pamela and "available" (come on...available?)
I *think* I understand the arguments against it: the cable companies *own* the actual lines privately (as opposed to phone lines which are subsidized). However, you're right about the competition. As I said elsewhere in this thread, our local government is sponsoring the monopoly on cable (as well as phone and electricity). The government regulation is actually causing *less* competition. Then, they try to undo their own regulations with more regulation! Oh well, I guess that's politics for you.
He's saying that if local authorities allowed *any* company to offer phone, cable, cable modem, electricity, etc. then there would be a lot more competition. I think that's a good idea. Where we live, due to government regulation, there is only *one* power company--this is a government sponsored monopoly. Another company tried to get our local government to deregulate the industry so they could compete in our area but no such luck.
So, in this case, the government is forcing a bad deal on consumers--not the other way around.
Also, I believe a privately owned business *does* indeed have rights...it's private property of a citizen.
So, is the fact that our cable company in town not only owns the actual lines but also the service a monopoly? It seems like it, but who knows (NAL)? If not, then why is a Telco that owns both telephone lines and the telephone service a monopoly? I've seen some here say that this is because of the government subsidization of the phone lines. However, shouldn't the DOJ split up monopolies even if they have nothing to do with the government directly? I guess I should learn something about anti-trust.;-)
Well, I think Joe Corporate might go with Alpha (like...amazon.com?). But the biggest use for Alpha is in sci/3d. I mean, floating point performance! I'd like to see BeOS running on Alpha...that'd be just too sweet!;-)
> NO ONE can say the reaction was not swift. In > most schools in Colorado, in the week after the > massacre at Columbine High School, pupils were > suspended if they turned up at school in trench > coats. The killers at Columbine had worn such > coats. Therefore, the threat was clear.
The threat was clear? Because they wore trenchcoats? Good grief, this author must be smoking crack.
You are right. As an American (both a geek and a Christian) looking on our society, I see nothing but filth and decay. Now, European society has a lot of filth and decay as well, but they *do* at least respect learning--*real* learning (not just regurgitation of facts). So do asian societies. Starting in the mid-19th century, we moved sharply toward an atheist society. With the institution of public schooling things really went downhill. We decided that it was no longer the parents' job to raise children. We decided that the government should raise children instead. Unfortunately, the US has decayed morally into a garbage heap. It will take awhile for our economic and political clout to die away. Right now, there's still no country with more freedom than the US (give it time!). As soon as I see someplace better I'll go there. You can write to me at jason.clouse@nospam.furman.edu. Just remove the 'nospam.'
That behavior is not determined by genetics? Everyone has this idea that genetics determines intelligence, morals, and everything else under the sun. Genetics determines physical characteristics only. And please don't start in with the argument about the brain being physical. The brain has nothing to do with a person's beliefs or intelligence.
You seem to really have a good grasp of the concept of "coolness." It certainly fits with my experiences in school. However, I think that home schooling could be part of the answer. Human beings were designed to be raised by parents--not the state. Moral training should begin at birth and should be undertaken by parents. I would have done so much better if I had been home-schooled from the beginning. I disagree with the notion that home-schooling induces a lack of social skills. I had great social-skills when I was young...it was only the continuous abuse at school that caused me to become an introvert. Also, now that I'm in college, I have no trouble being friends with people--even the "jocks." Everyone has matured by now. I will admit that home-schooling could and would run into serious problems in our society--but that is just because our society is already so messed up. Parents are self-centered and don't really care about their kids. Most of the parents don't have any morals either! I guess about the best you can say is that we're in deep trouble in this country and it'll take a miracle to get us out now.
Really, "wierd niche apps" work great on open-source(ish) models as well. For instance: POV-Ray (not GPL, I think), CSound, and many others. These are tools for marginalized communities, yet having the source code is a great asset to development. There are numerous esoteric music and graphical tools with available source code that really rock!
BTW, you're right about Free Software being a good example of free market competition. I mean, when a *community* can produce a product to compete against corporations, something has to be right.
But anyway, I have to disagree that their facts are basically right. Free Software *won't* remove stuff from the shelves. Free Software has *nothing* to do with Ralph Nader. Programmers who are interested in Free Software aren't driven by desire to make profit. *That* is why they come to incorrect conclusions. I don't care if MS or anyone else makes buggy proprietary software. I don't care if MS or any other corporation makes a lot of money. That's fine with me. However, I'll be using Linux.;-)
You said it better than I probably could. At any rate, I sent a message to these guys in which I tried to make them see that Free Software has nothing to do with Nader (have *you* ever seen any code with his name on it?); nor does it have anything to do with making a profit. If the motivation for writing Free Software was to make a profit, then it probably *would* die if things continued on like they are. That's not our motiviation though. We like to write software and we like to do it the right way--by not cutting corners and by employing careful craftsmanship. If one realizes that this is what Free Software is really about, then the article means nothing and is totally irrelevant.
BTW, I ended my message with the following inscription:
--A proud member of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy.
A bunch of scare tactics. Things are nowhere near as bad as they try to make them sound. If, however, you are seriously worried about our oxygen supply, start worrying about the oceans--the oceans produce 70% of our oxygen.
We absolutely do not want to make Congress do anything! The less they do, the better! At least with the Clinton impeachment they were too busy to mess things up.
I'm a Republican...and I'm for small government...
on
Al Gore Buzzword Bingo
·
· Score: 1
so neener, neener, neener!:-) I believe we should go back to the states and local government making the decisions. (The closer to home, the better)
That Intel doesn't really care for things to be portable. I mean, sure they're in favor of anything that'll run on their hardware, but they're less interested in seeing that same stuff run on other hardware. You can't really blame them, I guess; but still, it could *potentially* be harmful to the portability of open source stuff. I guess it just depends on how "nice" they decide to be...and how worried they are. If I were them, I wholdn't be *too* worried about it. I mean, most people are going to buy Intel, and it will fit their needs. They're a lot less "guilty" of ripping off their customers than MS is. MS *knows* their stuff doesn't meet anybody's needs!
You gave me something to think about. I thought maybe they were going to try to actually come up with a decent product to compete instead of FUD tactics, but perhaps this *is* just another tactic!
Slashdot Mirror
As for MacOSX, I won't be using it (and I *am* a musician). Apple, as always, has taken a masterpiece (NeXTSTEP in this case) and completely screwed it up. They are using QuickTime (which is crap) instead of striking a deal with CCRMA and distributing the amazing MusicKit. They have created an absolutely unusable GUI (why couldn't they have left the NeXTSTEP interface alone? it was much better than the MacOS interface). They still have such an elitest "we know best" attitude. They decide what is best for the end-user.
I'll stick with Linux/GNUstep.
P.S. GNUstep is getting better by the minute. There has been some talk about a GNUstep distro complete with Installer.app and everything. It'd be nice to run on the Hurd too. Check it out sometime.
As for X, I agree. What is really needed is not simplicity; but rather direct, powerful, and straight-forward solutions. The best solution for every problem...
And it rocks already. Just watch...
Kinda like a zipper sound? Usually a "dirty" graphics card. If you get out of X, make sure you unload gpm (so moving your mouse causes no change on your display), and then move your mouse, you should have no extra noises. If you get no zipping noises, it's likely to be the graphics card putting out tons of noise and your audio card not being sufficiently shielded.
The fact that it doesn't happen in Windows is a little puzzling. Perhaps the gain is turned down more in Windows? It could also be the driver. The driver can actually make a difference in the amount of interference you get.
How to fix it? If you think about it, there's quite a lot of RF and EM noise going on inside your computer and there's not a whole lot you can do but turn down the volume. As an extreme solution, you might consider looking up one of those projects to "wrap" your card in a kind of tinfoil shield. It's around the web somewhere. Of course, if you're that serious about clean recording you'll probably want to get a soundcard with digital I/O and a DAT to record on. Good luck.
The biggest problem with Windows, IMHO, is that they came up with an architecture and then ran with it. I don't know for sure, of course, but I highly suspect that they didn't throw away their first few attempts.
At any rate, X is a little dirty and bloated. One thing I desperately wish is that we could have direct access to the hardware if running the client and server on the same machine (by far, the most common situation) *without* breaking the very useful remote server capabilities. I do a good bit of graphical stuff (modeling and rendering) as well as real-time synthesis and it would be really nice to have a real OS (Linux) but have the direct hardware access (Windows). Execept, unlike Windows, it would be done cleanly and elegantly. I seem to remember hearing something about this functionality being added to X but don't know for sure.
Why not ban MS file formats altogether? I mean, if we are going to censor let's censor something that actually does damage: non-standard "standards." Certainly does a lot more damage than Pamela and "available" (come on...available?)
What do you do when the government ignores you?
I don't know, but when you figure it out let me know because our government in the US doesn't listen to a word I say--I'm not in the majority you see.
I *think* I understand the arguments against it: the cable companies *own* the actual lines privately (as opposed to phone lines which are subsidized). However, you're right about the competition. As I said elsewhere in this thread, our local government is sponsoring the monopoly on cable (as well as phone and electricity). The government regulation is actually causing *less* competition. Then, they try to undo their own regulations with more regulation! Oh well, I guess that's politics for you.
He's saying that if local authorities allowed *any* company to offer phone, cable, cable modem, electricity, etc. then there would be a lot more competition. I think that's a good idea. Where we live, due to government regulation, there is only *one* power company--this is a government sponsored monopoly. Another company tried to get our local government to deregulate the industry so they could compete in our area but no such luck.
So, in this case, the government is forcing a bad deal on consumers--not the other way around.
Also, I believe a privately owned business *does* indeed have rights...it's private property of a citizen.
So, is the fact that our cable company in town not only owns the actual lines but also the service a monopoly? It seems like it, but who knows (NAL)? If not, then why is a Telco that owns both telephone lines and the telephone service a monopoly? I've seen some here say that this is because of the government subsidization of the phone lines. However, shouldn't the DOJ split up monopolies even if they have nothing to do with the government directly? I guess I should learn something about anti-trust. ;-)
Well, I think Joe Corporate might go with Alpha (like...amazon.com?). But the biggest use for Alpha is in sci/3d. I mean, floating point performance! I'd like to see BeOS running on Alpha...that'd be just too sweet! ;-)
> NO ONE can say the reaction was not swift. In
> most schools in Colorado, in the week after the
> massacre at Columbine High School, pupils were
> suspended if they turned up at school in trench
> coats. The killers at Columbine had worn such
> coats. Therefore, the threat was clear.
The threat was clear? Because they wore trenchcoats? Good grief, this author must be smoking crack.
You are right. As an American (both a geek and a Christian) looking on our society, I see nothing but filth and decay. Now, European society has a lot of filth and decay as well, but they *do* at least respect learning--*real* learning (not just regurgitation of facts). So do asian societies. Starting in the mid-19th century, we moved sharply toward an atheist society. With the institution of public schooling things really went downhill. We decided that it was no longer the parents' job to raise children. We decided that the government should raise children instead. Unfortunately, the US has decayed morally into a garbage heap. It will take awhile for our economic and political clout to die away. Right now, there's still no country with more freedom than the US (give it time!). As soon as I see someplace better I'll go there. You can write to me at jason.clouse@nospam.furman.edu. Just remove the 'nospam.'
That behavior is not determined by genetics? Everyone has this idea that genetics determines intelligence, morals, and everything else under the sun. Genetics determines physical characteristics only. And please don't start in with the argument about the brain being physical. The brain has nothing to do with a person's beliefs or intelligence.
Secondly, the death penalty doesn't work, has never worked, and will never work.
Tell that to God.
You seem to really have a good grasp of the concept of "coolness." It certainly fits with my experiences in school. However, I think that home schooling could be part of the answer. Human beings were designed to be raised by parents--not the state. Moral training should begin at birth and should be undertaken by parents. I would have done so much better if I had been home-schooled from the beginning. I disagree with the notion that home-schooling induces a lack of social skills. I had great social-skills when I was young...it was only the continuous abuse at school that caused me to become an introvert. Also, now that I'm in college, I have no trouble being friends with people--even the "jocks." Everyone has matured by now. I will admit that home-schooling could and would run into serious problems in our society--but that is just because our society is already so messed up. Parents are self-centered and don't really care about their kids. Most of the parents don't have any morals either! I guess about the best you can say is that we're in deep trouble in this country and it'll take a miracle to get us out now.
--the now very depressed Art Tatum
BTW, you're right about Free Software being a good example of free market competition. I mean, when a *community* can produce a product to compete against corporations, something has to be right.
That's great! I'll have to add it to my list of quotations!
But anyway, I have to disagree that their facts are basically right. Free Software *won't* remove stuff from the shelves. Free Software has *nothing* to do with Ralph Nader. Programmers who are interested in Free Software aren't driven by desire to make profit. *That* is why they come to incorrect conclusions. I don't care if MS or anyone else makes buggy proprietary software. I don't care if MS or any other corporation makes a lot of money. That's fine with me. However, I'll be using Linux. ;-)
BTW, I ended my message with the following inscription:
--A proud member of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy.
That oughta confuse 'em a little bit! ;-)
A bunch of scare tactics. Things are nowhere near as bad as they try to make them sound. If, however, you are seriously worried about our oxygen supply, start worrying about the oceans--the oceans produce 70% of our oxygen.
We absolutely do not want to make Congress do anything! The less they do, the better! At least with the Clinton impeachment they were too busy to mess things up.
so neener, neener, neener! :-) I believe we should go back to the states and local government making the decisions. (The closer to home, the better)
That Intel doesn't really care for things to be portable. I mean, sure they're in favor of anything that'll run on their hardware, but they're less interested in seeing that same stuff run on other hardware. You can't really blame them, I guess; but still, it could *potentially* be harmful to the portability of open source stuff. I guess it just depends on how "nice" they decide to be...and how worried they are. If I were them, I wholdn't be *too* worried about it. I mean, most people are going to buy Intel, and it will fit their needs. They're a lot less "guilty" of ripping off their customers than MS is. MS *knows* their stuff doesn't meet anybody's needs!
You gave me something to think about. I thought maybe they were going to try to actually come up with a decent product to compete instead of FUD tactics, but perhaps this *is* just another tactic!