Whereas Windows is stuck in '50s-style mainframes? You did read about the UAV powered by windows, right? Or even Windows XP Embedded? Obviously not. Linux isn't the only kernel that can be embedded. Why do people think that?:)
Re:News for Nerds. Stuff that matters.
on
Latest SP2 News
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Good points, dude!
I'm one of those developers. I write OSS on Windows, because Windows does for me what I want. I'm not starting a windows vs. linux debate, but a maturity vs. immaturity debate. I can totally understand why people use linux. I really can. I even use it myself (tho not on my own desktop). I'd defend someone's right to use linux with all my might. Why do I get the feeling that sentiment wouldn't be reciprocated by the/. community? It's called objectivity, folks. If you want OSS to be respected, start respecting other operating sytems. Start respecting closed-source apps and developers, and they'll start respecting you more (they already respect you, but this cheap pot-shot name-calling only hurts that).
I find it increasingly difficult to talk to people who don't know about OSS and tell them how cool it is, because the community behind it is cheap. Really cheap. Are you all proud that you're bashing an operating system that your favourite OS is aspiring to replace? If linux had 95% of the desktop share, would you love it if people bashed it without any reason what-so-ever? Of course not. So don't do it to windows. Sure, pick up on the truly bad stuff, but also pick up the good stuff. Do the same for linux, as well. Be fair, that's all. Objectivity. It's your friend.
Anyway, I'll be called a troll for this. I don't care any more. I waste so much time wading through people talking out of their asses on here, it's hard to get to the actual stuff that matters.
But then MS has the luxury of over $60bn in cash in the bank, which linux doesn't. Free, open source software isn't a luxury. It's not even better than closed source. It's like comparing religions. Saying Windows has a bad legacy is as valid as saying Linux has a bad legacy. Grow up, please.
Because it's microsoft! That's the great thing on slashdot. If microsoft does something (or windows), it's instantly bad. If linux does the exact same thing, it's not only good, but was intentional, and here's umpteen million tenuous reasons as to why.
I hear ya. I just wish for a little objectivity here. If we can't accept the good and bad in every operating system, how can we forward ourselves? Imagine if evolution was unfair in its selection (if it could be) - we'd get crappy favoured creatures crapping out their lungs through poor design, while excellent creatures get wiped off the face of the earth for no good reason. Kind of a strange analogy, but you see what I mean.
Re:Currect track record
on
Latest SP2 News
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Whatever, buddy. Seriously. Think for yourself.
Win95 - ground-breaking. Paved the way for the GUIs in use in every subsequent windows version, and lots of *nix guis
Win98 - great for games (still is), supports the latest DirectX (still), has a very small footprint, boots fast and offers great hardware support
WinME - disappointing for some, exceedingly usable for most others. Say what you will, lots of people loved it
Win2000 - fantastic. Offered stability, great driver support, great networking, easy installs, perfect for the corporate environment (hence most places still using it)
WinXP - incredible. We're talking excelleng games/multimedia support, almost unlimited software catalogue, integrated auto-updating, visual themes, etc. etc. etc.
XPSP2 - a great step in the right direction, executed very well. If you can find fault in it, you can find fault in anything
2003 - One of the best server operating systems out there. Exceedingly fast, secure, stable, yet with great driver support, lots and lots of software, etc. Again, if you think it's bad there's something wrong.
At least get your arguments straight. Just because you label something as "disappointing" doesn't instantly wipe out the popular history that it was anything but. I know you have your head in the clouds, but even that shouldn't stop you from recognising truly important software.
Why? SP2 is fine, and all these bugs aren't even slightly severe, let alone show-stoppers.
Get rid of that "fuck micrsoft" attitude, start thinking for yourself, and actually take a look at it. It's a great addition to XP, and those who say it isn't have an alterior motive.
So you don't argue the points, but you argue the way they were said. That's a good admission of defeat if ever I saw one.
No-one's going to be glad that the US got done over, but then the US shouldn't have been there in the first place.
The US screwed up big-time. Nearly 1,000 dead! I mean, come on! How on earth is that a victory? The US controls some desert in Iraq. No cities outside Baghdad (and not even all of that). The US keeps getting its ass handed back to it by Sadr and his boys in Najaf. When the US retaliates? More civilians dead. As I've said before, to a republican, that's good, apparently. At least have the guts to admit you're wrong on this. The rest of the world has already worked it out, and half of your own country has too. It's only the Pro-Bush conservatives who are still flogging this dead horse of an argument.
1. Your bases cover the entire country, except for the entire villages and regions where US troops get regularly blown up in.
2. The enemy army was decimated after the first gulf war. 4th largest it was not. They had a handful of demoralised troops using old wepons. They hated Saddam more than you do (and the US took their jobs. great).
3. The "enemy" leadership. wow. Obviously not helping, seeing as the "enemy" is still kicking the crap out of your boys.
It amazes me that pro-Bush drones spout these ridiculous "facts", without checking them out themselves. It only takes 2 minutes on the net to see that the US army and administration has screwed not only themselves, but the iraqi people and nation. 10,000+ dead civilians doesn't make a great victory, especially seeing as their country wasn't a danger to anyone.
The war on terror in Iraq has well and truly been lost. The country is swarming with terrorists, flowing in from all the neighbouring countries, thanks to the stream of anti-US sentiment after the ridiculously unsensitive military tactics deployed in this war. The Ba'athists HATED those terrorists, and kept them under control (much the same as the FBI in the states - there are terrorists in the US, but the feds keep them under control (mostly)). After the US took Saddam, the terrorists had free reign to move in, recruit all the angry, armed men, and mobilise them against the US troops, and the US as a whole.
Of course, though, to Republicans, that's a victory. Fools.
They will dislike Americans, however, if they strut around wearing knee-high white fluffy socks with brown sandals, talk in a very loud voice, call everything "quaint", have a silly haircut like a ken doll, start every sentence with "gee", and take 2 hours at a ticket machine to buy a ticket.
Of course, I live in London so my view of American tourists probably isn't the most gracious you'll encounter;)
Germany, France, Portugal, Spain, etc. haven't recently invaded countries for purely selfish reasons, killing tens of thousands of innocent people. The US has, and that's why lots of people HATE the US government. They don't envy it. Why would Europeans envy the US? Freedom? We have more. Democracy? That, too.
Lots of Americans (usually the ones without passports) make these rash generalisations and assumptions about the behaviour of Europeans, not admitting that they have absolutely no idea of the causes. People around the world aren't angry at the US because "america has it so good", but because America keeps shitting on people who can't defend themselves, just to make America richer.
You also have to remember that America is playing catch-up to the social developments in Europe. The US was still well into slavery until very recently. The rest of Europe had given that up years and years before. Welfare? Not in the US. Free healthcare? Forget it. Hardly anything for Europeans to get all antsy-in-the-pantsy about.
I've heard what you posted a million times from random Americans. It's the easiest way to defend your country without admitting to the fact that there might actually be some weight behind the hatred and dislike. With your reasoning, you're unwilling to recognise the faults of the US, which is an action you seem to be simultaneously condemning. That huge, gaping lack of objectivity and dripping ideology shows through your post, and quite frankly whittles down your argument even further.
If the number of "IT professionals" is dropping (and I don't think it is, but then I've not thought of it much), then the number of linux advocates is certainly growing. How is the world supposed to take linux seriously when most of the (more vocal) people developing for it are on here slinging childish names at competitors. I've said it before, but imagine if microsoft.com was full of childish name-calling and crude, year-old half-truths. Objectivity, folks. Doesn't cost much:)
The beta was stable for ages before it went gold, and being an IT professional, I have access to more than one machine, so installing it wasn't dangerous;)
The things I find flamebaity are people constantly finding fault in things microsoft does that they wouldn't bat an eyelid over if it happened in the linux world. THAT's my beef, and something that's happening more and more.
You should check out the definition of robot. It clearly suggests that these things are robots. It says that "robot" includes "a machine or device that operates automatically or by remote control".
I don't think the two-legs thing is that much of a deal. After all, unless the human controllers have two levers - "left leg" and "right leg", and a balancing lever, the robot must be doing the balancing/walking itself. The bipedal robots recently invented take care of the actual task of walking themselves, leaving the human to simply select "turn left. move forward." and the robot will. As that's the case, why would AI that spits out "turn left. move forward." be any harder for a bipedal robot than, say, a wheeled one? It's like object-oriented development. The balance/leg-moving routines are seperate from the control routine. Replace the control routine with more code (instead of a person), et voila!:)
(ps and grossly off-topic why do so many people have a problem with "voila" in their posts? "wa laa" is the most common one I've seen. Doesn't anyone know a little french any more?)
Then this phone isn't for you. It is incredibly popular, so you are in the minority. If you want a basic phone, go and get one. Nokia still produce several base phones without all this "nonsense".
Lots of people have use for these sorts of phones. I know I do (I have a T610).
Of course, this is/., so people tend to think that everyone else thinks exactly like them. Oops.
Seriously, two of the biggest cellphone manufacturers are over here (Nokia, Ericsson), and we take to that sort of thing faster than the Americans. Minidisc, anyone? You also won't find anyone saying "bluetooth is dead!" this side of the pond, either, as lots of us actually use it daily.:)
I'm having a hard time believing that. I've installed SP2 on all manner of machines, and not a single one had any issues at all with activation. As far as I can tell, activation isn't even addressed with this release. I've even used it on "dodgy" product keys to see what would happen, and it installs fine. It stops windows update from working, but certainly does not deactivate windows OR office.
WHOA there, sunshine! Let's not make huge, blatantly incorrect statements here. I mean you're willing to tell me that every single piece of open source software is better than its closed source opponent? I mean, come ON! That's just freaking stupid. Seriously.
Do you have any idea what socialism actually means?? Obviously not if that's the sort of thing you spout. I mean, come on. Socialism is about social responsibility. Help those who have less. Feed the hungry, house the homeless, help everyone out. If you think that's making everyone equally poor and miserable, you need clinical help. Seriously.
Re:'Star Wars - Interactive' - God help us...
on
Star Wars on DVD
·
· Score: 1
Rap artists don't replace the original tracks with their alterations. Indeed, anyone who re-uses music like that releases their work alongside, and don't stop us from being able to buy the old versions on CD. There is a huge difference.
So we're nerds when it suits us (ie. bashing microsoft), yet professionals when that's better (ie professing how good something is). Which way is it?
Fifth Beatle? No, I just had access to the beta trial (as did thousands of people - it's not exactly prestigious), so I was running it before the fabled 2600 release:)
I didn't say everyone who has an AMD is an anti-intel zealot (that's clearly not the case, as you have demonstrated), I just said that every anti-intel zealot here has an AMD (which, you must agree, is exceedingly likely) - there is a difference;)
First of all your "fair or not" speech was exactly what I was talking about. You said "fair or not" windows sucks. So, by your own admission, if windows didn't suck, you'd still say it would. THAT's my point.
As for your crashing XP box, check your hardware. I can't tell you how stable XP is, even compared to my RH9 boxes - it's rock solid. Any time a computer is on the fritz like that, look beyond the OS. I know it's hard if you're jaded ("microsoft made a shitty product for years"), but it's worth it.
You have a go at me for being a zealot, then refuse to listen to my argument in a mature fashion. cheers.
Slashdot Mirror
Whereas Windows is stuck in '50s-style mainframes? You did read about the UAV powered by windows, right? Or even Windows XP Embedded? Obviously not. Linux isn't the only kernel that can be embedded. Why do people think that? :)
I'm one of those developers. I write OSS on Windows, because Windows does for me what I want. I'm not starting a windows vs. linux debate, but a maturity vs. immaturity debate. I can totally understand why people use linux. I really can. I even use it myself (tho not on my own desktop). I'd defend someone's right to use linux with all my might. Why do I get the feeling that sentiment wouldn't be reciprocated by the /. community? It's called objectivity, folks. If you want OSS to be respected, start respecting other operating sytems. Start respecting closed-source apps and developers, and they'll start respecting you more (they already respect you, but this cheap pot-shot name-calling only hurts that).
I find it increasingly difficult to talk to people who don't know about OSS and tell them how cool it is, because the community behind it is cheap. Really cheap. Are you all proud that you're bashing an operating system that your favourite OS is aspiring to replace? If linux had 95% of the desktop share, would you love it if people bashed it without any reason what-so-ever? Of course not. So don't do it to windows. Sure, pick up on the truly bad stuff, but also pick up the good stuff. Do the same for linux, as well. Be fair, that's all. Objectivity. It's your friend.
Anyway, I'll be called a troll for this. I don't care any more. I waste so much time wading through people talking out of their asses on here, it's hard to get to the actual stuff that matters.
But then MS has the luxury of over $60bn in cash in the bank, which linux doesn't. Free, open source software isn't a luxury. It's not even better than closed source. It's like comparing religions. Saying Windows has a bad legacy is as valid as saying Linux has a bad legacy. Grow up, please.
I hear ya. I just wish for a little objectivity here. If we can't accept the good and bad in every operating system, how can we forward ourselves? Imagine if evolution was unfair in its selection (if it could be) - we'd get crappy favoured creatures crapping out their lungs through poor design, while excellent creatures get wiped off the face of the earth for no good reason. Kind of a strange analogy, but you see what I mean.
Win95 - ground-breaking. Paved the way for the GUIs in use in every subsequent windows version, and lots of *nix guis
Win98 - great for games (still is), supports the latest DirectX (still), has a very small footprint, boots fast and offers great hardware support
WinME - disappointing for some, exceedingly usable for most others. Say what you will, lots of people loved it
Win2000 - fantastic. Offered stability, great driver support, great networking, easy installs, perfect for the corporate environment (hence most places still using it)
WinXP - incredible. We're talking excelleng games/multimedia support, almost unlimited software catalogue, integrated auto-updating, visual themes, etc. etc. etc.
XPSP2 - a great step in the right direction, executed very well. If you can find fault in it, you can find fault in anything
2003 - One of the best server operating systems out there. Exceedingly fast, secure, stable, yet with great driver support, lots and lots of software, etc. Again, if you think it's bad there's something wrong.
At least get your arguments straight. Just because you label something as "disappointing" doesn't instantly wipe out the popular history that it was anything but. I know you have your head in the clouds, but even that shouldn't stop you from recognising truly important software.
Get rid of that "fuck micrsoft" attitude, start thinking for yourself, and actually take a look at it. It's a great addition to XP, and those who say it isn't have an alterior motive.
No-one's going to be glad that the US got done over, but then the US shouldn't have been there in the first place.
The US screwed up big-time. Nearly 1,000 dead! I mean, come on! How on earth is that a victory? The US controls some desert in Iraq. No cities outside Baghdad (and not even all of that). The US keeps getting its ass handed back to it by Sadr and his boys in Najaf. When the US retaliates? More civilians dead. As I've said before, to a republican, that's good, apparently. At least have the guts to admit you're wrong on this. The rest of the world has already worked it out, and half of your own country has too. It's only the Pro-Bush conservatives who are still flogging this dead horse of an argument.
2. The enemy army was decimated after the first gulf war. 4th largest it was not. They had a handful of demoralised troops using old wepons. They hated Saddam more than you do (and the US took their jobs. great).
3. The "enemy" leadership. wow. Obviously not helping, seeing as the "enemy" is still kicking the crap out of your boys.
It amazes me that pro-Bush drones spout these ridiculous "facts", without checking them out themselves. It only takes 2 minutes on the net to see that the US army and administration has screwed not only themselves, but the iraqi people and nation. 10,000+ dead civilians doesn't make a great victory, especially seeing as their country wasn't a danger to anyone.
The war on terror in Iraq has well and truly been lost. The country is swarming with terrorists, flowing in from all the neighbouring countries, thanks to the stream of anti-US sentiment after the ridiculously unsensitive military tactics deployed in this war. The Ba'athists HATED those terrorists, and kept them under control (much the same as the FBI in the states - there are terrorists in the US, but the feds keep them under control (mostly)). After the US took Saddam, the terrorists had free reign to move in, recruit all the angry, armed men, and mobilise them against the US troops, and the US as a whole.
Of course, though, to Republicans, that's a victory. Fools.
Of course, I live in London so my view of American tourists probably isn't the most gracious you'll encounter ;)
Lots of Americans (usually the ones without passports) make these rash generalisations and assumptions about the behaviour of Europeans, not admitting that they have absolutely no idea of the causes. People around the world aren't angry at the US because "america has it so good", but because America keeps shitting on people who can't defend themselves, just to make America richer.
You also have to remember that America is playing catch-up to the social developments in Europe. The US was still well into slavery until very recently. The rest of Europe had given that up years and years before. Welfare? Not in the US. Free healthcare? Forget it. Hardly anything for Europeans to get all antsy-in-the-pantsy about.
I've heard what you posted a million times from random Americans. It's the easiest way to defend your country without admitting to the fact that there might actually be some weight behind the hatred and dislike. With your reasoning, you're unwilling to recognise the faults of the US, which is an action you seem to be simultaneously condemning. That huge, gaping lack of objectivity and dripping ideology shows through your post, and quite frankly whittles down your argument even further.
The beta was stable for ages before it went gold, and being an IT professional, I have access to more than one machine, so installing it wasn't dangerous ;)
The things I find flamebaity are people constantly finding fault in things microsoft does that they wouldn't bat an eyelid over if it happened in the linux world. THAT's my beef, and something that's happening more and more.
You should check out the definition of robot. It clearly suggests that these things are robots. It says that "robot" includes "a machine or device that operates automatically or by remote control".
(ps and grossly off-topic why do so many people have a problem with "voila" in their posts? "wa laa" is the most common one I've seen. Doesn't anyone know a little french any more?)
Lots of people have use for these sorts of phones. I know I do (I have a T610).
Of course, this is /., so people tend to think that everyone else thinks exactly like them. Oops.
Seriously, two of the biggest cellphone manufacturers are over here (Nokia, Ericsson), and we take to that sort of thing faster than the Americans. Minidisc, anyone? You also won't find anyone saying "bluetooth is dead!" this side of the pond, either, as lots of us actually use it daily. :)
But then he couldn't post on slashdot and bash microsoft! get with the picture, man!
I'm having a hard time believing that. I've installed SP2 on all manner of machines, and not a single one had any issues at all with activation. As far as I can tell, activation isn't even addressed with this release. I've even used it on "dodgy" product keys to see what would happen, and it installs fine. It stops windows update from working, but certainly does not deactivate windows OR office.
WHOA there, sunshine! Let's not make huge, blatantly incorrect statements here. I mean you're willing to tell me that every single piece of open source software is better than its closed source opponent? I mean, come ON! That's just freaking stupid. Seriously.
Do you have any idea what socialism actually means?? Obviously not if that's the sort of thing you spout. I mean, come on. Socialism is about social responsibility. Help those who have less. Feed the hungry, house the homeless, help everyone out. If you think that's making everyone equally poor and miserable, you need clinical help. Seriously.
Rap artists don't replace the original tracks with their alterations. Indeed, anyone who re-uses music like that releases their work alongside, and don't stop us from being able to buy the old versions on CD. There is a huge difference.
But how is that different from any other manufacturer's equipment? I do that all the time with my PC notebooks (and they were cheaper ;))
Fifth Beatle? No, I just had access to the beta trial (as did thousands of people - it's not exactly prestigious), so I was running it before the fabled 2600 release :)
I didn't say everyone who has an AMD is an anti-intel zealot (that's clearly not the case, as you have demonstrated), I just said that every anti-intel zealot here has an AMD (which, you must agree, is exceedingly likely) - there is a difference ;)
I did read the post. The guy was at work, and my post was about building machines at work. How did I not read the article??
As for your crashing XP box, check your hardware. I can't tell you how stable XP is, even compared to my RH9 boxes - it's rock solid. Any time a computer is on the fritz like that, look beyond the OS. I know it's hard if you're jaded ("microsoft made a shitty product for years"), but it's worth it.
You have a go at me for being a zealot, then refuse to listen to my argument in a mature fashion. cheers.