If you don't like Unity, you don't have to go to Linux Mint, or Debian, or Windows or a Mac.
KDE or XFCE are simple installs from inside Synaptic or the command-line. And unlike Unity and Gnome 3. They aren't filled with bugs. They actually work - and work well.
I've long been an Ubuntu user and fan. I'm terribly disappointed in this release. It's filled with bugs. And Unity is being forced as the user interface, instead of being offered as an option. Unity is a great tablet (or netbook) user interface. But I need a real desktop interface supporting multiple monitors with multiple virtual desktops. It appears Ubuntu is headed in a different direction. For now, I'll use Kubuntu (KDE). But if Canonical continues down this nonsensical path, I'll be finding another distro.
The multiple monitor issue was a killer for me. UNITY's panel of applications displayed right down the middle of the the desktop (the seam between the two monitors), making it the most stupid user-interface I've ever used. The arrangement was almost as nonsensical as moving it to the left side of the left monitor, where it required a huge motion with the mouse to initiate any action.
Great touchpad interface. Too bad that's not what I need. Hello KDE.
The quality of the 11.04 release was the poorest for any Ubuntu release I've ever seen.
Unity failed to work out of the box for me. On my dual screen monitor, the program icons displayed down the left side of the right-side screen - effectively in the middle of the display. There were no borders on any window, so windows couldn't be moved. The display was filled with glitches that appeared and disappeared intermittently. Compiz was broken. Emerald issued a segfault. Metacity provided some basic functionality - but barely.
I tried for about three hours to fix (via the Ubuntu forums and blogs) - and made some headway. Ultimately, Unity looked like a nice tablet interface. Probably a nice netbook interface.
But I'm a power user. I typically have four virtual desktops open with a large number of apps running. Unity's big icons and dumbed-down feature set is just the opposite of what I need.
I tried Gnome 3 on Ubuntu, following the PPA install instructions. I couldn't get it to boot (some ICEauthority issue). But it looks like Gnome 3 features a similarly dumbed-down interface as UNITY.
So, I've already moved to KDE (Kubuntu). It's a bit of a learning curve - but I'm willing to invest the time. It works the way I want to work.
You know that we will be seeing an announcement soon assuring us the Oracle full embraces and supports Open Source and that its commitment to the MySQL is eternal.
Which is why they are focusing their support on the core features.
As a result some of the high-end features deployed by a only small contingent of MySQL users will no longer be supported.
Back in the old days, I recall writing TSR (terminate and stay resident) DOS programs in Assembly language. The code needed to be very tight to fit into a PC's teeny RAM (64K system total?) Great learning experience, but the ROI on time invested, unthinkable today.
I don't think that any of the six Linux boxes that I have installed in my home show up on anyone's market share analysis.
Most of the traditional marketshare measurements are done based on boxes sold with pre-installed OS's or other sales-based tracking methods. Only the Dell, Wal-Mart, EeePC (and a few others) would make these lists. That's still pretty small, but growing.
But consider that all of those retail Linux boxes that I mentioned above were introduced recently. I think we are seeing just the start of a new trend.
Oh, and all of the above ignores servers, where Linux has a very respectable, and well documented, share of the market.
And have you ever looked at the list of the top 500 fastest supercomputers in the world. Linux has almost a monopoly.
The real issue with Comcast is not traffic shaping.
ISPs need to be able to manage traffic during peak load times so that high priority packets get through quickly while low priority packets wait a little longer.
The issue with Comcast is that they are intercepting the packets, masquerading as the destination server and terminating streams. This is clearly improper behavior.
Here is the core issue:
In normal circumstances, if customers experienced this type of behavior from their ISP, they would simply take their business elsewhere. For example, in the days when dial-up access was in vogue, if your ISP did this, you would drop them in a heartbeat.
The problem is that cable TV operators are granted regulated monopolies within specific geographic areas. While that concept works OK for cable TV, it does not work well when these companies play ISP. Comcast customers are bitching because they can't easily switch to another ISP.
The real solution we need is to deregulate cable TV, just like we did for telephones. This will force broadband ISPs to *SERVE* their customers or die. And then, this type of behavior would cease immediately.
We wouldn't need to talk about "net neutrality", We would not waste our time trying to find the right set of words by which to regulate ISPs.
Those companies whose actions harmed their customers would either: (1) go out of business; or (2) wake up and quickly change their ways.
That is the power of a free market. Things get much better when the government just gets out of the way.
Insightful??? Hello - meta-moderators??? How the hell is this insightful?
Go ahead, load Vista, OSX and Ubuntu on the identical machines. The performance of OSX and Ubuntu will scream while Vista trudges along.
Sure SP1 may improve Vista performance to some degree. But the biggest performance drain is the integrated-DRM features that the MPAA and RIAA convinced Microsoft to design into Vista. That won't disappear in any service pack.
While we are at it, since Vista was released, I've upgraded from Edgy to Feisty to Gutsy, that's two major upgrades. In addition, over that time, there have been numerous updates to the Linux kernel. How long does it take for Microsoft to assemble a meaningful service pack?
The fact of the matter is that like Windows ME, Vista is defective by design. The sooner Microsoft admits this and moves on, the better for them.
While I am sure that some will want to attribute this to global warming, we don't need to invent any fancy causes for this phenomenon. The underlying cause is simple:
The global human population has exploded compared to Neanderthal times. More births means more opportunities for mutation, hence faster evolution.
In SCI-FI series, Eureka (episode three of season one, titled "Before I forget") , Henry invents a hand-held device that erases memories.
See Wikipedia for full description.
YouTube has a video of showing the device in action here.
Instead of focusing on customer's wants and needs, Microsoft instead decided to listen and address the wants and needs of the RIAA and MPAA.
The result: a bloated, slower and less reliable OS that offers little real-world improvements to users.
Most people are willing to work through the quirks of new software when it offers features that they can't get elsewhere. Vista offers so little, that there is no reason for users to replace their existing hardware and live through the pain.
The real danger for Microsoft is that both OS/X and Linux offer users equal/better features without the DRM performance drain and with a more stability.
It's a different world. Microsoft is not used to competing on product features and performance.
Why would nvidia's drivers work with Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP, Linux (32 and 64 bit), Solaris and FreeBSD - but not with Vista?
Do you think that nvidia forgot how to code video drivers? No, that doesn't seem logical.
Well what is different between Vista and all of the others?
How about all the stupid Vista DRM features? You know, the ones that ATI was bitching about when they said (http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_ cost.html):
An ATI product manager responsible for producing the actual hardware says:
"These costs are passed on to the consumer"
"This cost is passed on to all consumers"
"This cost is passed on to purchasers of multimedia PC's"
"Costs are passed on to consumers"
"Costs are passed on to consumers, especially early adopters"
I'm sure that the lion's share of these costs are software related. More software cost means more code. More code means more opportunity for unexpected features (aka "bugs").
"Why are free-desktop developers neglecting to consider an alternative to the penguin?"
The basic premise of the author is flawed. This is akin to asking, "When did you stop beating your wife?" The author presumes that free desktop authors develop for Linux only; and that assumption is flat out wrong.
Consider these points:
Firefox is developed to run on MS-Windows, Mac OS-X and Linux.
OpenOffice.org offers downloads for MS-Windows, Mac OS-X, Linux, Solaris, and FreeBSD
KDE 4.0 will provide porting libraries to support MS-Windows and Mac OS-X
Heck, I can execute many free desktop applications on my Windows PC via Cygwin.
And the reason that Linux has failed (and will continue to fail) to obtain widespread adoption has much more to do with Microsoft's monopoly and their continued antitrust activities than Linux desktop functionality.
Label this article as flame bait. Let's move on...
"Maybe airplane designers should delve into the fossil record a little more."
Evolution really works. Survival of the fittest means that the wing design of present day birds has a definite advantage over early wing designs that died out.
I believe that airplane designers will ultimately emulate the flexible wing design of today's birds.
The box takes the HDMI input and makes the HDCP authorization routine happy. The switch will output via component video.
Yeah - I know this one is $1500. But it takes just about any input and converts to just about any output. I've seen early products (seems like it was from Sweden) that just did the HDMI-to-component video conversion for $150.
I know that the HDCP technology can dynamically be updated to turn off the compliance key in these devices. But there will be two problems: (1)there will be a zillion of these on the market; and (2) consumers (and their lawyers) will be screaming.
So Microsoft will zip this all up to save disk space (up to 75% savings)?
With disk space so cheap, why would you want to slow down the opening and saving of each document?
Stupid decision in my mind, unless you need some patented technology (don't forget about MS's patent license required) to read/write to the new "open" format.
Slashdot Mirror
If you don't like Unity, you don't have to go to Linux Mint, or Debian, or Windows or a Mac.
KDE or XFCE are simple installs from inside Synaptic or the command-line. And unlike Unity and Gnome 3. They aren't filled with bugs. They actually work - and work well.
I've long been an Ubuntu user and fan. I'm terribly disappointed in this release. It's filled with bugs. And Unity is being forced as the user interface, instead of being offered as an option. Unity is a great tablet (or netbook) user interface. But I need a real desktop interface supporting multiple monitors with multiple virtual desktops. It appears Ubuntu is headed in a different direction. For now, I'll use Kubuntu (KDE). But if Canonical continues down this nonsensical path, I'll be finding another distro.
The multiple monitor issue was a killer for me. UNITY's panel of applications displayed right down the middle of the the desktop (the seam between the two monitors), making it the most stupid user-interface I've ever used. The arrangement was almost as nonsensical as moving it to the left side of the left monitor, where it required a huge motion with the mouse to initiate any action.
Great touchpad interface. Too bad that's not what I need. Hello KDE.
Wrong, Wrong, Wrong. I suggest you try it out before commenting. It's not like Win7 at all. It's way dumber.
The quality of the 11.04 release was the poorest for any Ubuntu release I've ever seen.
Unity failed to work out of the box for me. On my dual screen monitor, the program icons displayed down the left side of the right-side screen - effectively in the middle of the display. There were no borders on any window, so windows couldn't be moved. The display was filled with glitches that appeared and disappeared intermittently. Compiz was broken. Emerald issued a segfault. Metacity provided some basic functionality - but barely.
I tried for about three hours to fix (via the Ubuntu forums and blogs) - and made some headway. Ultimately, Unity looked like a nice tablet interface. Probably a nice netbook interface.
But I'm a power user. I typically have four virtual desktops open with a large number of apps running. Unity's big icons and dumbed-down feature set is just the opposite of what I need.
I tried Gnome 3 on Ubuntu, following the PPA install instructions. I couldn't get it to boot (some ICEauthority issue). But it looks like Gnome 3 features a similarly dumbed-down interface as UNITY.
So, I've already moved to KDE (Kubuntu). It's a bit of a learning curve - but I'm willing to invest the time. It works the way I want to work.
Probably 90% of corporations out there making money are using Microsoft software.
And 90% of corporations out there making money have servers running Linux. What's your point?
You know that we will be seeing an announcement soon assuring us the Oracle full embraces and supports Open Source and that its commitment to the MySQL is eternal.
Which is why they are focusing their support on the core features.
As a result some of the high-end features deployed by a only small contingent of MySQL users will no longer be supported.
Back in the old days, I recall writing TSR (terminate and stay resident) DOS programs in Assembly language. The code needed to be very tight to fit into a PC's teeny RAM (64K system total?) Great learning experience, but the ROI on time invested, unthinkable today.
Do they call it the Afar Region because it is not Upclose?
It should be relatively straightforward to detect Google's commercials and strip them from the video stream.
I don't think that any of the six Linux boxes that I have installed in my home show up on anyone's market share analysis.
Most of the traditional marketshare measurements are done based on boxes sold with pre-installed OS's or other sales-based tracking methods. Only the Dell, Wal-Mart, EeePC (and a few others) would make these lists. That's still pretty small, but growing.
But consider that all of those retail Linux boxes that I mentioned above were introduced recently. I think we are seeing just the start of a new trend.
Oh, and all of the above ignores servers, where Linux has a very respectable, and well documented, share of the market.
And have you ever looked at the list of the top 500 fastest supercomputers in the world. Linux has almost a monopoly.
The real issue with Comcast is not traffic shaping.
ISPs need to be able to manage traffic during peak load times so that high priority packets get through quickly while low priority packets wait a little longer.
The issue with Comcast is that they are intercepting the packets, masquerading as the destination server and terminating streams. This is clearly improper behavior.
Here is the core issue:
In normal circumstances, if customers experienced this type of behavior from their ISP, they would simply take their business elsewhere. For example, in the days when dial-up access was in vogue, if your ISP did this, you would drop them in a heartbeat.
The problem is that cable TV operators are granted regulated monopolies within specific geographic areas. While that concept works OK for cable TV, it does not work well when these companies play ISP. Comcast customers are bitching because they can't easily switch to another ISP.
The real solution we need is to deregulate cable TV, just like we did for telephones. This will force broadband ISPs to *SERVE* their customers or die. And then, this type of behavior would cease immediately.
We wouldn't need to talk about "net neutrality", We would not waste our time trying to find the right set of words by which to regulate ISPs.
Those companies whose actions harmed their customers would either: (1) go out of business; or (2) wake up and quickly change their ways.
That is the power of a free market. Things get much better when the government just gets out of the way.
Insightful??? Hello - meta-moderators??? How the hell is this insightful?
Go ahead, load Vista, OSX and Ubuntu on the identical machines. The performance of OSX and Ubuntu will scream while Vista trudges along.
Sure SP1 may improve Vista performance to some degree. But the biggest performance drain is the integrated-DRM features that the MPAA and RIAA convinced Microsoft to design into Vista. That won't disappear in any service pack.
While we are at it, since Vista was released, I've upgraded from Edgy to Feisty to Gutsy, that's two major upgrades. In addition, over that time, there have been numerous updates to the Linux kernel. How long does it take for Microsoft to assemble a meaningful service pack?
The fact of the matter is that like Windows ME, Vista is defective by design. The sooner Microsoft admits this and moves on, the better for them.
Go back to math school!
The growth of Linux was 117% compared to Apples 73% increase in market share.
Sure it is peanuts. But just wait and you'll see that 2008 is the year of the Linux desktop 8^)
While I am sure that some will want to attribute this to global warming, we don't need to invent any fancy causes for this phenomenon. The underlying cause is simple:
The global human population has exploded compared to Neanderthal times. More births means more opportunities for mutation, hence faster evolution.
Occam's razor prevails once again!
In SCI-FI series, Eureka (episode three of season one, titled "Before I forget") , Henry invents a hand-held device that erases memories. See Wikipedia for full description. YouTube has a video of showing the device in action here.
Perhaps, but 100% wrong!!!
As noted above, the MythTV developers already have a solution that will replace Zap2It Labs service. So no, it will not be negatively impacted.
And yes, I LOVE MY MYTH TV!!!
Instead of focusing on customer's wants and needs, Microsoft instead decided to listen and address the wants and needs of the RIAA and MPAA.
The result: a bloated, slower and less reliable OS that offers little real-world improvements to users.
Most people are willing to work through the quirks of new software when it offers features that they can't get elsewhere. Vista offers so little, that there is no reason for users to replace their existing hardware and live through the pain.
The real danger for Microsoft is that both OS/X and Linux offer users equal/better features without the DRM performance drain and with a more stability.
It's a different world. Microsoft is not used to competing on product features and performance.
CD and DVD sales are dropping like turds in a toilet bowl.
Who wants to pay a lot more money for DRM-handicapped content that, for the average Joe, does not add much to the entertainment value.
For now, DVD quality is good enough.
By the time the movie houses decide to offer HD content that is not hobbled, everyone will be downloading content to hard drives over the 'net.
My prognostication is that neither Blue-Ray or HD-DVD ever reach critical mass.
Let's see...
_ cost.html):
Why would nvidia's drivers work with Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP, Linux (32 and 64 bit), Solaris and FreeBSD - but not with Vista?
Do you think that nvidia forgot how to code video drivers? No, that doesn't seem logical.
Well what is different between Vista and all of the others?
How about all the stupid Vista DRM features? You know, the ones that ATI was bitching about when they said (http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista
An ATI product manager responsible for producing the actual hardware says:
"These costs are passed on to the consumer"
"This cost is passed on to all consumers"
"This cost is passed on to purchasers of multimedia PC's"
"Costs are passed on to consumers"
"Costs are passed on to consumers, especially early adopters"
I'm sure that the lion's share of these costs are software related. More software cost means more code. More code means more opportunity for unexpected features (aka "bugs").
Don't blame nvidia. Blame Microsoft.
The basic premise of the author is flawed. This is akin to asking, "When did you stop beating your wife?" The author presumes that free desktop authors develop for Linux only; and that assumption is flat out wrong.
Consider these points:
Heck, I can execute many free desktop applications on my Windows PC via Cygwin.
And the reason that Linux has failed (and will continue to fail) to obtain widespread adoption has much more to do with Microsoft's monopoly and their continued antitrust activities than Linux desktop functionality.
Label this article as flame bait. Let's move on...
Evolution really works. Survival of the fittest means that the wing design of present day birds has a definite advantage over early wing designs that died out.
I believe that airplane designers will ultimately emulate the flexible wing design of today's birds.
With MythTV, I am able to skip or trim out all commercials regardless of what ABC and the MSOs do.
In a similar way, I strip out most/all of the online ads via Firefox and AdBlock.
My time is valuable and these tools allow me to view what I want to see without distraction and delay.
Microsoft is actively waging a very ugly litigation war on IBM using SCO as a proxy.
Is anyone really surprised that IBM would stop sending license fees to Redmond???
The box takes the HDMI input and makes the HDCP authorization routine happy. The switch will output via component video.
Yeah - I know this one is $1500. But it takes just about any input and converts to just about any output. I've seen early products (seems like it was from Sweden) that just did the HDMI-to-component video conversion for $150.
I know that the HDCP technology can dynamically be updated to turn off the compliance key in these devices. But there will be two problems: (1)there will be a zillion of these on the market; and (2) consumers (and their lawyers) will be screaming.
So Microsoft will zip this all up to save disk space (up to 75% savings)?
With disk space so cheap, why would you want to slow down the opening and saving of each document?
Stupid decision in my mind, unless you need some patented technology (don't forget about MS's patent license required) to read/write to the new "open" format.