You're right that this "innovation" is a lot more than a reimplementation of symbolic links. In fact, in the world of Windows, it might even be considered a "new innovation".
Problem is, from the sketchy details in the article, this looks like a hack to fix a problem that traces all the way back to the broken disk storage model inherited from DOS - a problem that doesn't even exist under UNIX.
The UNIX model creates a single storage tree with the ability to mount new devices (disk partitions or NFS exported directories) at any point in the heirarchy. It's a model designed from the ground up around the concept of a network. The main advantage of this model is that it's simple to install a single copy of an application in a standard location on a network server (/usr/local or/opt or whatever) and simply mount this location on all the individual workstations. This way, you have one copy of the software (the "batch of bits") that can be used by any number of hosts.
With DOS, everything was assumed to be local. All your libraries are on the C:/WINDOWS/SYSTEM directory. Everyone has their own copy of the Registry that points to where things are located. If you want to install a piece of software, in most cases you have to install it locally, or at least all the DLL files are local. Hence, if you have 1,000 people on the network using MS Word, you end up with 1,000 identical copies of MS Word instaled! If you want to upgrade software for all those users, you have to do it 1,000 times.
With a storage model like that, it's no wonder MS is looking for ways to save space on identical copies of software. If it's static data (like installed software, then backups are less of an issue. I would think that the backup would grab a copy of the copy and write it out as if it was a unique file.
Still, it's nothing more than a patch to a fundamentally broken architecture!
> In other words, I couldn't care less whether it makes it big or not.
You're missing the point.
The Best OS in the World is useless if it doesn't have the applications you need.
The point is, if you want to do useful things with your computer, you need applications, or drivers for your hardware toys. Individuals can, and in many cases, have written large complicated applications to do complex things, all under Open Source.
But, where are the enterprise applications? The sophisticated CAD and design packages? Where are the customers that make it economically attractive for companies to put time and money into these projects? What about device drivers for that blazing fast new video card you just bought for your games? For that matter, where are the games?
The fact that Linux has "hit the big time" means that there are a lot of people, some backed by large companies, who are spending time and money to make Linux useful in many new and exciting contexts.
On the other hand, if all you want to do is email and run Netscape to read Slashdot, then you can climb back into your hole somewhere and ignore all the new and interesting things that are going on here....
I've downloaded plenty of "stable" kernels before, so I figured, what the heck, I'll try it...
Well, after a minor bit of fiddling to get it configured and built, I fired it up. No obvious problems. I did see a couple of interesting new things, like NFSv3.
Then I checked my RealPlayer. I've been fighting a problem for a while now, ever since I upgraded my MB to one with a built in ESS Solo 1 sound subsystem. All other sounds play fine (Quake, etc), but RealPlayer always screwed up the sample rates. Everything sounded like Alvin and the Chipmunks.
So, I tried it with the 2.3.41 kernel, and it works now! I haven't read all the release documentation, but there must have been fixes to the ESS drivers.
Obviously, I'm taking my life and data in my hands, but I just wanted to say that there ARE advantages to being on the cuting edge.
The USPS has been in the business of privacy and security a lot longer than most other corporations in the USA have existed. Even considering the fact that they have extensive "powers" granted to them - some of which might be even be considered unconstitutional - I think they have a better track record than most other companies.
Let's just say that I'd rather trust the USPS with my secure documents than the typical ISP or, God help us, AOL or Microsoft...
In whole, I found the article pretty dumb. Do you really need to repeat "Usenet is old and tired, but some people still find it useful" five or six times in order to get your point across?
It's obvious these people don't really know what SPAM is, and why it's a nusance, or for that matter, any of the history of the Internet and what part USENET plays in it.
What does pointing a bunch of people to an online poll have to do with putting spurious bids on a very expensive auction??? We're comparing apples and oranges here. There's nothing wrong with "stuffing" an online poll. I've seen it done by many different groups. I'm sure that MS zealots do it too. Anyone STOOPID enough to trust the statistical validity of an online poll as anything more than a popularity contest deserves whatever lousy data they get.
HOWEVER, if some troll comes along and puts in a $5000 bid for something they have no intention of honoring (how much you willing to wager that "linuxsux" is really going to pay for that check?) smacks of a p***k the size of Long Island.
On the other hand, if he really is going to pay up, then there's no reason why a Linux hater shouldn't be able to bid on and buy that particular piece of memorabilia. It's an auction open to all - Political Correctness not required.
(Didn't they just have a similar problem with that T-Rex they tried to auction for $5M on eBay? They had so many fake bids that they decided to move it to another site that validated the identity of the bidder before accepting. It seems like the eBay model quickly breaks down when you get over a thousand $$ or so...)
I agree... there is a Linux "community", and I am happy to be a part of it. I even feel somehow "cheated" when I see nonsense like LinuxONE. On the flip side, I feel great every time I hear about another major software or hardware provider who picks up support for "my" OS.
However, I still think we take ourselves too seriously. When I start reading, "we ought to be out there..." or "If we play our cards right...", I start to worry. I do not consider myself an anarchist, but even I like a little anarchy now and then. After all, it is a fundamental building block of the Internet. There are a lot of things in life worth fighting for, but I don't think a "loose-knit but well-connected community" is one of them. Working for? YES! But let's focus our attention and energy on making Good Software, not on punishing people who might damage our "brand name".
After all, isn't it the "battle mentality" that got Microsoft into the state it's in now???
> It associates gross fraud and failure with Linux.
I don't think so. The world is full of both suckers and those who take advantage of suckers. If someone uses the "Linux" name to take advantage of suckers, they might generate some bad press, but as you can see by the current crop of news articles, most journalists can recognize an obvious sham when they see one.
What worries me more is the possibility of a legitimate company like RedHat or VA Linux running into problems (real or perceived), which will do a lot more to create deep down distrust for "free" software. Another possibility is a big news story about someone planting a serious Trojan inside an Open Source program. Again, this could cause a deep seated distrust for Open Source - products which are not tightly controlled by a corporate entity which can be held responsible.
Of course, the fact that MS has hidden functions in its systems to download customer information to MS hasn't appeared to hurt its ability to sell huge quantities of software...;-/
As much as I like to feel like I'm a part of a Linux "community", I think people are making way too much out of the concept. Linux Community this. Linux Community that. The Linux Community has to Stick Together. Long Live the Linux Community.
We're starting to sound like a Religion.
Now, I think it's important to have a sense of unity and be able to do things together, but all this blather about the Community makes it sound like we are all the same, or at least, we all have common goals and ambitions. It sounds like we're all here to defend the Linux "name brand", to uphold the Faith, to chase the Infidels back to the dark holes they have emerged from.
Excuse me, but I already have a religion, and it's not Linux. I am here (1) to make money (i.e., my work), (2) to have a good time using software that's fun and (3) help out some other people (like kids in schools or NFP organizations). Linux happens to be the best tool I've found to do this, but that doesn't mean I worship the Brand Name.
If some stupid investors lose their shirts on a bobus IPO, I'll shed no tears over them. It won't affect my goals (1), (2) or (3) above. If anything, it will deflate the incredible hype over all things Linux, and perhaps we can all get back to real work again.
No. People hate LinuxONE either because (1) they are jealous ("Why can't I make millions like they do?"), or (2) because they are taking it as a slap in their collective faces (the "community" thing) or (3) because they are honestly bothered by the lies and broken promises that this guy has left in his wake.
This is not my Crusade however. I am glad that the news is getting out, and it sounds like this whole thing is going to flop, but I'll lose no sleep over it. I have more important things to worry about than some sheister taking advantage of my favorite hobby.
Well, Linux isn't exactly Unix, but perhaps what they mean is 10 years of UNIX experience, with a lot of Linux specific training in the past few years. I find that about 90% of my Unix experience transferrs directly over to working on Linux, though there are plenty of quirks to re-learn, and a heck of a lot of new technology to keep up with.
The power of the market to decide who is best suited to serve people is all well and good when the market is Open. Looking at the letter though, this company is trying to obtain "exclusive rights" to the LINUX name and/or particular distributions. With legal protections, they are trying to obtain the help of the government to bludgen any competition, removing the ability of "the market" to move freely. In other words, "don't buy it" is no longer a viable option!
> The answer here is that people need to take responsibility for their own health...
No.
The point is that more and more employers are requiring employees to work from home.
If the conditions of my employment require me to perform certain activities, then OSHA wants to make sure that the employer is responsible for providing a safe environment for me to work in. If that means an ergonomic chair, then the requirements at the office should be no different from the requirements at home. A decent chair is no less a "tool" of my trade than the keyboard and monitor are...
Surprise, surprise, but there are still a lot of people out there running very happily on old 486 boxes. If all you want to do is run an old word processor (e.g., MSWord 6.0), or write email, why spend money on a new computer? All it gets you is a new set of headaches (i.e., Win98), with new interfaces to learn and new drivers to update and new software to buy, all for no perceivable change in functionality!
A few lines of code to fix the RTC, and you're off and running again.
Well, just to prove that Linux is not "invulnerable" to Y2K bugs, my web server got itself all wrapped up in knots and had to be physically rebooted ("init" wouldn't even respond to Ctrl-Alt-Del!). It was fine at midnight, but sometime later in the morning, a runaway process chewed up all the memory, to the point where I couldn't even get a console login.
I suspect the "nist" time update utility from www.icce.rug.nl (which I run in the root crontab) is the guilty party. I checked it and found that it choked on a "00" year. I managed to get it working, but it appears to be full of other Y2K bugs (leap year stuff in particular). I've found that cron tends to go wild when you suddenly change the system date by 100 years or so...;-)
This is the sort of thing I think we will continue to see for the next few months into the New Year. Not a biggie, but enough to bring a computer or two down...
Just wanted to add my thanks to you guys (and girls) out there who DID spend countless hours making sure we'd have heat and light and water on New Year's Day. We spent the roll-over downtown, watching the great fireworks (Rochester, NY). The evening would have been perfect, except for one very LOUD, very DRUNK and very OBNOXIOUS revelrer next to us (three word vocab, one of which was "Moth'a") who spent the first ten minutes of the Millenium cursing at all the doomsayers, saying "See, the lights didn't go out you bunch of @#$&*@!!##!"
If it hadn't been for you, this particular slob would now be whimpering and shivering in a cold dark corner of his house, cursing technology and wondering where his next meal was going to come from...
Ummm... isn't that the definition of ANY Y2K bug? They are all "bad programming", or at least programming decisions based on assumptions that are no longer true.
People keep saying, "Why handwriting recognition? I can type faster than I can write."
You are missing the point. In many situations, you don't have a keyboard! This is particularly true with PDA's, but any compact, hand held device will have the same need. Many embedded devices would be easier to use with some sort of handwriting recognition.
If you are sitting in front of a computer, there is no doubt that the keyboard is a better input device, at least for most people, but computers are quickly growing out of the confined model of mouse, keyboard, CRT desktops that we have grown to know and love.
Think of of how we could use StarTrek style data pads.
> Now, it's great that everyone here on/. knows that linuxone sucks. Does anyone in the "real world" know?
Call me cynical, but with this kind of background, any investor who loses his shirt on this IPO (if it busts) due to lack of research deserves every cent he flushes down the drain. There is so much hype these days, and no real understanding of what makes a company worth investing in. It's not like this article was revealing anything a competent investor couldn't have found, and the article is published where anyone can find it if they care to look. I have little sympathy for investors who lose money on pure speculation and hype.
To whit: I wouldn't lose sleep over it.
BTW, I thought the author was... uh, to say the least... generous. Pretty amusing article, if it weren't for the fact that we're dealing with a serious issue here.
> If this is to be a free software project, which most Linux software packages are, it would need CPAs on its staff, arguably 53 of them (50 states, Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, federal)
I think you can reduce the complexity by an order of magnitude by only covering the Federal tax. I don't know how other states are, but here in NY, I use TurboTax to fill out the Federal tax, and then just copy the numbers over to the state form by hand. About 80% of the state form is, "now, copy the figure from line 92a on the Federal form to this box..."
When it comes down to it, the REAL advantage of using Income Tax software is the ability to file electronicaly! I've done this the last couple of years, and it greatly speeds up how fast you get your return!
Slashdot Mirror
Problem is, from the sketchy details in the article, this looks like a hack to fix a problem that traces all the way back to the broken disk storage model inherited from DOS - a problem that doesn't even exist under UNIX.
The UNIX model creates a single storage tree with the ability to mount new devices (disk partitions or NFS exported directories) at any point in the heirarchy. It's a model designed from the ground up around the concept of a network. The main advantage of this model is that it's simple to install a single copy of an application in a standard location on a network server (/usr/local or /opt or whatever) and simply mount this location on all the individual workstations. This way, you have one copy of the software (the "batch of bits") that can be used by any number of hosts.
With DOS, everything was assumed to be local. All your libraries are on the C:/WINDOWS/SYSTEM directory. Everyone has their own copy of the Registry that points to where things are located. If you want to install a piece of software, in most cases you have to install it locally, or at least all the DLL files are local. Hence, if you have 1,000 people on the network using MS Word, you end up with 1,000 identical copies of MS Word instaled! If you want to upgrade software for all those users, you have to do it 1,000 times.
With a storage model like that, it's no wonder MS is looking for ways to save space on identical copies of software. If it's static data (like installed software, then backups are less of an issue. I would think that the backup would grab a copy of the copy and write it out as if it was a unique file.
Still, it's nothing more than a patch to a fundamentally broken architecture!
My impression is that this isn't the guy bitching about the posts, but rather suggesting a way to satisfy the people who are bitching and moaning...
It didn't seem like that bad a suggestion to me.
Any screen shots of the controls?
You're missing the point.
The Best OS in the World is useless if it doesn't have the applications you need.
The point is, if you want to do useful things with your computer, you need applications, or drivers for your hardware toys. Individuals can, and in many cases, have written large complicated applications to do complex things, all under Open Source.
But, where are the enterprise applications? The sophisticated CAD and design packages? Where are the customers that make it economically attractive for companies to put time and money into these projects? What about device drivers for that blazing fast new video card you just bought for your games? For that matter, where are the games?
The fact that Linux has "hit the big time" means that there are a lot of people, some backed by large companies, who are spending time and money to make Linux useful in many new and exciting contexts.
On the other hand, if all you want to do is email and run Netscape to read Slashdot, then you can climb back into your hole somewhere and ignore all the new and interesting things that are going on here....
Well, after a minor bit of fiddling to get it configured and built, I fired it up. No obvious problems. I did see a couple of interesting new things, like NFSv3.
Then I checked my RealPlayer. I've been fighting a problem for a while now, ever since I upgraded my MB to one with a built in ESS Solo 1 sound subsystem. All other sounds play fine (Quake, etc), but RealPlayer always screwed up the sample rates. Everything sounded like Alvin and the Chipmunks.
So, I tried it with the 2.3.41 kernel, and it works now! I haven't read all the release documentation, but there must have been fixes to the ESS drivers.
Obviously, I'm taking my life and data in my hands, but I just wanted to say that there ARE advantages to being on the cuting edge.
Just make sure you have good backups...
Let's just say that I'd rather trust the USPS with my secure documents than the typical ISP or, God help us, AOL or Microsoft...
It's obvious these people don't really know what SPAM is, and why it's a nusance, or for that matter, any of the history of the Internet and what part USENET plays in it.
Oh well....
What does pointing a bunch of people to an online poll have to do with putting spurious bids on a very expensive auction??? We're comparing apples and oranges here. There's nothing wrong with "stuffing" an online poll. I've seen it done by many different groups. I'm sure that MS zealots do it too. Anyone STOOPID enough to trust the statistical validity of an online poll as anything more than a popularity contest deserves whatever lousy data they get.
HOWEVER, if some troll comes along and puts in a $5000 bid for something they have no intention of honoring (how much you willing to wager that "linuxsux" is really going to pay for that check?) smacks of a p***k the size of Long Island.
On the other hand, if he really is going to pay up, then there's no reason why a Linux hater shouldn't be able to bid on and buy that particular piece of memorabilia. It's an auction open to all - Political Correctness not required.
(Didn't they just have a similar problem with that T-Rex they tried to auction for $5M on eBay? They had so many fake bids that they decided to move it to another site that validated the identity of the bidder before accepting. It seems like the eBay model quickly breaks down when you get over a thousand $$ or so...)
However, I still think we take ourselves too seriously. When I start reading, "we ought to be out there..." or "If we play our cards right...", I start to worry. I do not consider myself an anarchist, but even I like a little anarchy now and then. After all, it is a fundamental building block of the Internet. There are a lot of things in life worth fighting for, but I don't think a "loose-knit but well-connected community" is one of them. Working for? YES! But let's focus our attention and energy on making Good Software, not on punishing people who might damage our "brand name".
After all, isn't it the "battle mentality" that got Microsoft into the state it's in now???
I don't think so. The world is full of both suckers and those who take advantage of suckers. If someone uses the "Linux" name to take advantage of suckers, they might generate some bad press, but as you can see by the current crop of news articles, most journalists can recognize an obvious sham when they see one.
What worries me more is the possibility of a legitimate company like RedHat or VA Linux running into problems (real or perceived), which will do a lot more to create deep down distrust for "free" software. Another possibility is a big news story about someone planting a serious Trojan inside an Open Source program. Again, this could cause a deep seated distrust for Open Source - products which are not tightly controlled by a corporate entity which can be held responsible.
Of course, the fact that MS has hidden functions in its systems to download customer information to MS hasn't appeared to hurt its ability to sell huge quantities of software... ;-/
We're starting to sound like a Religion.
Now, I think it's important to have a sense of unity and be able to do things together, but all this blather about the Community makes it sound like we are all the same, or at least, we all have common goals and ambitions. It sounds like we're all here to defend the Linux "name brand", to uphold the Faith, to chase the Infidels back to the dark holes they have emerged from.
Excuse me, but I already have a religion, and it's not Linux. I am here (1) to make money (i.e., my work), (2) to have a good time using software that's fun and (3) help out some other people (like kids in schools or NFP organizations). Linux happens to be the best tool I've found to do this, but that doesn't mean I worship the Brand Name.
If some stupid investors lose their shirts on a bobus IPO, I'll shed no tears over them. It won't affect my goals (1), (2) or (3) above. If anything, it will deflate the incredible hype over all things Linux, and perhaps we can all get back to real work again.
No. People hate LinuxONE either because (1) they are jealous ("Why can't I make millions like they do?"), or (2) because they are taking it as a slap in their collective faces (the "community" thing) or (3) because they are honestly bothered by the lies and broken promises that this guy has left in his wake.
This is not my Crusade however. I am glad that the news is getting out, and it sounds like this whole thing is going to flop, but I'll lose no sleep over it. I have more important things to worry about than some sheister taking advantage of my favorite hobby.
Well, Linux isn't exactly Unix, but perhaps what they mean is 10 years of UNIX experience, with a lot of Linux specific training in the past few years. I find that about 90% of my Unix experience transferrs directly over to working on Linux, though there are plenty of quirks to re-learn, and a heck of a lot of new technology to keep up with.
The power of the market to decide who is best suited to serve people is all well and good when the market is Open. Looking at the letter though, this company is trying to obtain "exclusive rights" to the LINUX name and/or particular distributions. With legal protections, they are trying to obtain the help of the government to bludgen any competition, removing the ability of "the market" to move freely. In other words, "don't buy it" is no longer a viable option!
How about:
No.
The point is that more and more employers are requiring employees to work from home.
If the conditions of my employment require me to perform certain activities, then OSHA wants to make sure that the employer is responsible for providing a safe environment for me to work in. If that means an ergonomic chair, then the requirements at the office should be no different from the requirements at home. A decent chair is no less a "tool" of my trade than the keyboard and monitor are...
Actually, it's not gibberish, but I think you need to be an old Usenet hacker to get the joke...
rot13 anyone?
IF IT AIN'T BUSTED, DON'T FIX IT.
Surprise, surprise, but there are still a lot of people out there running very happily on old 486 boxes. If all you want to do is run an old word processor (e.g., MSWord 6.0), or write email, why spend money on a new computer? All it gets you is a new set of headaches (i.e., Win98), with new interfaces to learn and new drivers to update and new software to buy, all for no perceivable change in functionality!
A few lines of code to fix the RTC, and you're off and running again.
Well, just to prove that Linux is not "invulnerable" to Y2K bugs, my web server got itself all wrapped up in knots and had to be physically rebooted ("init" wouldn't even respond to Ctrl-Alt-Del!). It was fine at midnight, but sometime later in the morning, a runaway process chewed up all the memory, to the point where I couldn't even get a console login.
I suspect the "nist" time update utility from www.icce.rug.nl (which I run in the root crontab) is the guilty party. I checked it and found that it choked on a "00" year. I managed to get it working, but it appears to be full of other Y2K bugs (leap year stuff in particular). I've found that cron tends to go wild when you suddenly change the system date by 100 years or so... ;-)
This is the sort of thing I think we will continue to see for the next few months into the New Year. Not a biggie, but enough to bring a computer or two down...
If it hadn't been for you, this particular slob would now be whimpering and shivering in a cold dark corner of his house, cursing technology and wondering where his next meal was going to come from...
Ummm... isn't that the definition of ANY Y2K bug? They are all "bad programming", or at least programming decisions based on assumptions that are no longer true.
You are missing the point. In many situations, you don't have a keyboard! This is particularly true with PDA's, but any compact, hand held device will have the same need. Many embedded devices would be easier to use with some sort of handwriting recognition.
If you are sitting in front of a computer, there is no doubt that the keyboard is a better input device, at least for most people, but computers are quickly growing out of the confined model of mouse, keyboard, CRT desktops that we have grown to know and love.
Think of of how we could use StarTrek style data pads.
Call me cynical, but with this kind of background, any investor who loses his shirt on this IPO (if it busts) due to lack of research deserves every cent he flushes down the drain. There is so much hype these days, and no real understanding of what makes a company worth investing in. It's not like this article was revealing anything a competent investor couldn't have found, and the article is published where anyone can find it if they care to look. I have little sympathy for investors who lose money on pure speculation and hype.
To whit: I wouldn't lose sleep over it.
BTW, I thought the author was... uh, to say the least... generous. Pretty amusing article, if it weren't for the fact that we're dealing with a serious issue here.
I think you can reduce the complexity by an order of magnitude by only covering the Federal tax. I don't know how other states are, but here in NY, I use TurboTax to fill out the Federal tax, and then just copy the numbers over to the state form by hand. About 80% of the state form is, "now, copy the figure from line 92a on the Federal form to this box..."
When it comes down to it, the REAL advantage of using Income Tax software is the ability to file electronicaly! I've done this the last couple of years, and it greatly speeds up how fast you get your return!