1 - Don't be silly, I use XP on one of my machines daily and I haven't had a bluescreen in more than a year. Last time I did it was bad memory.
2 - I get slightly better battery life on my laptop in XP compared to linux - About 15 minutes better. I could probably eek out a bit more in linux, but the point is neither has a big advantage.
3 - The XP machine mentioned in point one hasn't been reinstalled in an even longer time period than the last bluescreen.
4 - No real argument here, MS ships with atrocious defaults regarding security.
Its mildly funny, and certainly not a troll, but its not exactly accurate.
No offense, but if you think you absolutely know truth, and are an athiest, then you don't have the best mindset for being a scientist. Perhaps I should have capitalized "Truth" to make the concept more clear. I'm sure you know lots of individual truths, most people do - but thats not what I was talking about. Group 2 is certainly the hardest to have a concrete example of, because there are very few people who truely believe that there is no Truth. Atheism and nihilism come closest, though, because they are negative beliefs. They are based on the absence of something rather than the presence of something.
No scientist knows the "TRUTH". Someone may someday, I doubt it, but we certainly don't yet. I don't know of a field of science where new discoveries aren't still being made - otherwise there would be no scientists in that field. As for atheism, you can't disprove that god or gods exist anymore than you can prove them. Its a decent assumption given the lack of evidence but you can't absolutely know it. True atheism requires nearly as much faith as most religions.
My point regarding conflict between 1 and 3 is that they are not mutually exclusive. 1 will often take offense with 3, however. Certainly if you think you know the Truth, you will not be happy with someone questioning that.
So, I'd probably say you're in group 3. I think you misunderstood my usage of "truth," but if you're actively looking for more knowlege as most scientists are, you're certainly not a member of group 1. You may call yourself an athiest, but do you believe it so strongly that you would deny the existence of god even if there were proof? I doubt it - that makes you more of an agnostic than an athiest. Certainly most agnostics will lean toward the absence of a god since there is an absence of proof.
I had an interesting discussion about this in a philosophy class a while ago. Basically, there are 3 types of people in the world-
1. Those who think they know truth - most religions
2. Those who think they know there is no truth - atheism, nihilism
3. Those who know they don't know the truth, but keep trying to find it - science
Only 1 and 2 directly conflict. 1 and 3, can coexist, as can 2 and 3, though it may be an uneasy coexistence. But the possiblity exists that group 1 or 2 is right, so group 3 can't discount them completely. Of course if a member of group 1 (or even 2, but I can't think of a historical example of this happening) is zealous enough there exists the possibility for conflict with group 3.
Evolution and Creationism are a good example of this possible conflict - there isn't really anything in evolutionary theory that "proves" religion wrong - its just an interpetation of physical evidence. However, it doesn't match up with a literal interpetation of the bible, so creationists will certainly take offense to evolutionary theory.
You have options, and it has gotten better. You still can't walk into a store and preview the music before you buy it, but you can with most of the legal download services.
Still can't? You used to be able to, at better stores. All that I know of have stopped allowing this, however.
Actually they had Athlon XP-M low voltage models too, in the same range of power consumption as the new (Athlon64) ones. Fujitsu used them in their thin and light line, as well as Averatec. Probably a couple other thin and lights with them, as well. The summary for the article is a bit misleading, it makes it sound like these are the first LV cpus AMD has released. The actual news is that they're releasing LV Athlon64s.
I don't know what kind of computer you're using, but mine doesn't really have any sharp edges or tiny switches, and has just a few jumpers (Optical drives, clear CMOS, possibly a couple others that I never touched or cared about). And no, it doesn't look like a plastic fishtank, and certainly not a glowing one.:)
Sure, frequently released updates can be seen as an advantage. I enjoy trying out new versions of software. But spacing out major updates isn't really a major disadvantage either. Normal people don't like buying/downloading a new cd every couple months. Saying one or the other is preferable is not really truthful.. each can be better in a certain setting.
However, if you bought a XP cd today, it would have probably SP 1 included, unless you bought a copy thats been sitting around in some warehouse for a year or two. Saying something is "unusable" without updates is just plain asinine though. I guess nobody could use those XP boxes for the year or so before SP 1 came out, right?
Yeah, its certainly better than that. Still doesn't look too amazing, but I haven't really used it, since all my windows machines are behind a linux router. I've played around with it a bit and it definately doesn't block both in and out traffic on the blocked ports.
Because we all know there are never patches or new versions for Linux... Right. Lets take a comparison from the Linux world, shall we?
Say I just installed ImaginaryDistro 1.0 a couple months ago, and now 1.1 comes out. There's new stuff I'd like, including some security and stability fixes. I'm on dial-up, so I can do one of two things - wait a long time for the download, or order a CD. The exact same options you have with Windows.
I'm not seeing the problem here... Patches are a fact of life, no matter what OS you're using. Dial-up users can either suck it up and download them, order a CD, or get a buddy with broadband to download the files and burn a CD. Again, the only difference here is Linux distros usually release more often, so the CD you buy/download is less likely to have a bunch of new updates available. Would you prefer MS release more often, and charge a $50 upgrade fee each time?
I'm wondering how you think Microsoft could possibly support hardware (SATA) that came out after XP was released on the boot CD. Likewise, I can't use a 2001 Redhat/Debian/SuSE/whatever CD to install onto a SATA drive. Be happy they at least included a way to load the drivers for new/non-standard storage hardware during the intial install.
The only advantage of linux in this case is more frequent updates, nothing more.
And frankly, if it took you 4 hours to install the "service packs," all one of them, you either have no idea what you're doing or a slow connection, neither of which are Microsoft's responsibility.
I'm all for pointing out real problems with MS and Windows, but lets stick to real problems, or we all just look like zealous idiots.
I'd say the speed issue is at least partly OS X's, or more likely Apple's X11 implementation's, fault. I've never done extensive testing, but I know that pretty much every X11 app I use on my OS X machine feels quite a bit faster on the same machine in Linux (Gentoo PPC). Also, Photoshop is pretty heavily PPC optimized, which is why Apple loves using Photoshop benchmarks when they release new machines. I'm guessing the Gimp is not.
Have you used Photoshop on a Mac? It doesn't use the same crappy MDI interface that the windows version does.. Its pretty similar to the gimp as far as window management on the Mac.
Yes, building the big stuff takes a while. Fortunately, big KDE/Gnome/OpenOffice/etc upgrades don't come out all that often. And when they do, its not hard to let them build while you carry on with whatever it is you were doing.
He said "requires you to configure almost everything by hand".. and thats true. Starting from the default, you edit it by hand, unless you install GUI or whatever tools yourself. He never said he didn't start with a default config.
And this is different from how gentoo works how? The defaults need to be edited, generally. He probably started from the exact same example config file as you, this is often all that is installed when emerging a new package, or a slightly modified version.
Slashdot Mirror
Um, ok?
1 - Don't be silly, I use XP on one of my machines daily and I haven't had a bluescreen in more than a year. Last time I did it was bad memory.
2 - I get slightly better battery life on my laptop in XP compared to linux - About 15 minutes better. I could probably eek out a bit more in linux, but the point is neither has a big advantage.
3 - The XP machine mentioned in point one hasn't been reinstalled in an even longer time period than the last bluescreen.
4 - No real argument here, MS ships with atrocious defaults regarding security.
Its mildly funny, and certainly not a troll, but its not exactly accurate.
No offense, but if you think you absolutely know truth, and are an athiest, then you don't have the best mindset for being a scientist. Perhaps I should have capitalized "Truth" to make the concept more clear. I'm sure you know lots of individual truths, most people do - but thats not what I was talking about. Group 2 is certainly the hardest to have a concrete example of, because there are very few people who truely believe that there is no Truth. Atheism and nihilism come closest, though, because they are negative beliefs. They are based on the absence of something rather than the presence of something.
No scientist knows the "TRUTH". Someone may someday, I doubt it, but we certainly don't yet. I don't know of a field of science where new discoveries aren't still being made - otherwise there would be no scientists in that field. As for atheism, you can't disprove that god or gods exist anymore than you can prove them. Its a decent assumption given the lack of evidence but you can't absolutely know it. True atheism requires nearly as much faith as most religions.
My point regarding conflict between 1 and 3 is that they are not mutually exclusive. 1 will often take offense with 3, however. Certainly if you think you know the Truth, you will not be happy with someone questioning that.
So, I'd probably say you're in group 3. I think you misunderstood my usage of "truth," but if you're actively looking for more knowlege as most scientists are, you're certainly not a member of group 1. You may call yourself an athiest, but do you believe it so strongly that you would deny the existence of god even if there were proof? I doubt it - that makes you more of an agnostic than an athiest. Certainly most agnostics will lean toward the absence of a god since there is an absence of proof.
I had an interesting discussion about this in a philosophy class a while ago. Basically, there are 3 types of people in the world-
1. Those who think they know truth - most religions
2. Those who think they know there is no truth - atheism, nihilism
3. Those who know they don't know the truth, but keep trying to find it - science
Only 1 and 2 directly conflict. 1 and 3, can coexist, as can 2 and 3, though it may be an uneasy coexistence. But the possiblity exists that group 1 or 2 is right, so group 3 can't discount them completely. Of course if a member of group 1 (or even 2, but I can't think of a historical example of this happening) is zealous enough there exists the possibility for conflict with group 3.
Evolution and Creationism are a good example of this possible conflict - there isn't really anything in evolutionary theory that "proves" religion wrong - its just an interpetation of physical evidence. However, it doesn't match up with a literal interpetation of the bible, so creationists will certainly take offense to evolutionary theory.
There were a couple stores that allowed previewing any CD where I grew up (near Seattle, WA). I believe Tower Records was one of them.
How is he screwed on Unreal? Epic is one of the few companies that actually supports linux gaming - both server AND client.
You have options, and it has gotten better. You still can't walk into a store and preview the music before you buy it, but you can with most of the legal download services.
Still can't? You used to be able to, at better stores. All that I know of have stopped allowing this, however.
Much less dangerous than a screwdriver. You can't stab someone in the eye with encryption.
Actually they had Athlon XP-M low voltage models too, in the same range of power consumption as the new (Athlon64) ones. Fujitsu used them in their thin and light line, as well as Averatec. Probably a couple other thin and lights with them, as well. The summary for the article is a bit misleading, it makes it sound like these are the first LV cpus AMD has released. The actual news is that they're releasing LV Athlon64s.
I doubt it. I'm pretty sure I saw something like you're describing years and years ago (think 486/68040 age) and it still isn't cheap...
I don't know what kind of computer you're using, but mine doesn't really have any sharp edges or tiny switches, and has just a few jumpers (Optical drives, clear CMOS, possibly a couple others that I never touched or cared about). And no, it doesn't look like a plastic fishtank, and certainly not a glowing one. :)
Yes, it does have flaws, and plenty of them. I just prefer to see the complaints which are vaild, rather than made up or exaggerated crap..
Sure, frequently released updates can be seen as an advantage. I enjoy trying out new versions of software. But spacing out major updates isn't really a major disadvantage either. Normal people don't like buying/downloading a new cd every couple months. Saying one or the other is preferable is not really truthful.. each can be better in a certain setting.
However, if you bought a XP cd today, it would have probably SP 1 included, unless you bought a copy thats been sitting around in some warehouse for a year or two. Saying something is "unusable" without updates is just plain asinine though. I guess nobody could use those XP boxes for the year or so before SP 1 came out, right?
Yeah, its certainly better than that. Still doesn't look too amazing, but I haven't really used it, since all my windows machines are behind a linux router. I've played around with it a bit and it definately doesn't block both in and out traffic on the blocked ports.
Because we all know there are never patches or new versions for Linux... Right. Lets take a comparison from the Linux world, shall we?
Say I just installed ImaginaryDistro 1.0 a couple months ago, and now 1.1 comes out. There's new stuff I'd like, including some security and stability fixes. I'm on dial-up, so I can do one of two things - wait a long time for the download, or order a CD. The exact same options you have with Windows.
I'm not seeing the problem here... Patches are a fact of life, no matter what OS you're using. Dial-up users can either suck it up and download them, order a CD, or get a buddy with broadband to download the files and burn a CD. Again, the only difference here is Linux distros usually release more often, so the CD you buy/download is less likely to have a bunch of new updates available. Would you prefer MS release more often, and charge a $50 upgrade fee each time?
XP comes with a firewall. I make no claims to its security, but it is there.
Post-install usage maybe? You only install once, unless you're really good at breaking things.. its really not the most important part of an OS.
I'm wondering how you think Microsoft could possibly support hardware (SATA) that came out after XP was released on the boot CD. Likewise, I can't use a 2001 Redhat/Debian/SuSE/whatever CD to install onto a SATA drive. Be happy they at least included a way to load the drivers for new/non-standard storage hardware during the intial install.
The only advantage of linux in this case is more frequent updates, nothing more.
And frankly, if it took you 4 hours to install the "service packs," all one of them, you either have no idea what you're doing or a slow connection, neither of which are Microsoft's responsibility.
I'm all for pointing out real problems with MS and Windows, but lets stick to real problems, or we all just look like zealous idiots.
I agree.. There's bacteria everywhere!? Especially in warm moist places?? I'm so suprised.
I'd say the speed issue is at least partly OS X's, or more likely Apple's X11 implementation's, fault. I've never done extensive testing, but I know that pretty much every X11 app I use on my OS X machine feels quite a bit faster on the same machine in Linux (Gentoo PPC). Also, Photoshop is pretty heavily PPC optimized, which is why Apple loves using Photoshop benchmarks when they release new machines. I'm guessing the Gimp is not.
Have you used Photoshop on a Mac? It doesn't use the same crappy MDI interface that the windows version does.. Its pretty similar to the gimp as far as window management on the Mac.
Yes, building the big stuff takes a while. Fortunately, big KDE/Gnome/OpenOffice/etc upgrades don't come out all that often. And when they do, its not hard to let them build while you carry on with whatever it is you were doing.
He said "requires you to configure almost everything by hand".. and thats true. Starting from the default, you edit it by hand, unless you install GUI or whatever tools yourself. He never said he didn't start with a default config.
Nope, ATI's linux drivers are utter trash compared to NV's, imho.
And this is different from how gentoo works how? The defaults need to be edited, generally. He probably started from the exact same example config file as you, this is often all that is installed when emerging a new package, or a slightly modified version.
Not to mention the reality/makeover/whatever crap. Yeesh.