10.0, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, and maybe 10.4 was a series of releases where performance improved with each update. I don't run 10.5 so can't comment if the trend continues.
Actually, those were just incomplete operating systems in my opinion, lacking important things like proper 2d and 3d acceleration, and then releasing it in the next version as it goes on, APIs not properly coded, so it gets rewritten, changed as the versions go on while introducing more crappy stuff.
To put it simply, they put out a shitty product initially and are now fixing it.
Steve Jobs talks about how adding something like Quartz 2D extreme (they renamed it to QuartzGL for some reason later on) is the future and then because it's such a shoddy piece of crap, end up disabling it in 10.4 due to the instability and apparently worse performance it brings...
I would not use Apple as a good example of Page's Law.
As a result, the DOS version and every other version of Doom are ports. The iPhone version is essentially on its native, original platform, probably utilizing the original code with some tweaks for the touch controls, etc.
Considering how much backwards compatibility and APIs Apple keep breaking -- I doubt it.
How about enhancing the game engine with polygon graphics like http://www.doomsdayhq.com/...? I read the iPhone port has audio improvements. Can we get those for the original computer/PC port?
The problem is, any time you modify the original game content and decide to sell it stores, you have to get the game rerated by the BBFC and ESRB. It's often the cause as to why developers and publishers just provide updates on their website, rather than integrating the updates with the published discs.
Although this situation is clearly unacceptable, I would not have called your remark insightful. Apple has been pretty busy with the security updates: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1222
That's not really busy in my opinion. 3-5 security updates a month is nothing to be impressed by and it doesn't tell me if they fix all their vulnerabilities, which as we all know, they haven't.
As a whole, I would say leopard is pretty secure (when compared to linux, compared to windows it's ironclad).
You know, I've managed an OS X server before, you can't fool me. Considering how they almost don't issue an security update for the entire duration of the server release is pretty scary.
I've also had OS X on my desktop before and I've seen how Apple pretty much just ignores low profile security issues with the opensource software they use, from Samba to CUPS. Often including the updates in the next 'major' version of OS X. Meanwhile, Linux distributions get it patched practically next day.
They just want it to work right out of the box without any bizarre configurations past user accounts, and time and date.
From another post I did on the same thread since you can't read:
The average home user buys the OS already installed on the computer, including Linux systems which don't have this issue.
You think Ubuntu is hard from scratch for a average home user? You should see how much hell home users go through trying to do something as simple as finding out what hardware they have in their computer, because Windows won't tell them so they can't figure out what drivers they need and Windows provide the drivers, the video and audio codecs, updated applications for things like pdf, Java etc. This problem is made worse further by the fact that big OEMs like Dell, Sony etc. market computers with different hardware combinations under the same name - thus the user finds the wrong hardware information.
You may find installing "ubuntu-restricted-extras" easy but the average user would have no idea to even install that.
From the same post: Mean while, on Ubuntu, all they have to do is hit a few check boxes and install "ubuntu-restricted-extras" from add/remove software - which hinted all over Google, wikis and documentation (thus the user won't have too much of an issue figuring it out compared to Windows).
Even if he installed "ubuntu-restricted-extras," how would he do it? From a command prompt?
The add/remove software icon in the main menu, it's even one of the most visible packages when you start it up.
If it's legal to ship with Ubuntu, why isn't it in the box?
It isn't. Things like Microsoft's fonts cannot be packaged with Ubuntu legally. The license states it must be redistributed as it's own, unmodified, solo package. Thus Ubuntu gets around that by installing the liberty fonts which are in my opinion a very good replacement for the fonts and offer the ability to download Microsoft's fonts for you.
The attitude that you display furthers the alienation that most users feel with Linux and its community.
Why do you think I would behave the way I do on #Ubuntu here? This isn't a help channel. Seriously, are you that thick that you assume people will behave like they do at church, at a football game etc?
You're skeptical because you can't see how inferior the installation and customization experience actually is to the non Linux user.
No, I realize how hard it is for the average user, which can be seen in my previous posts.
The nVidia graphics drivers gave me problems, too, and I had to boot back to Windows and go online to discover what the hell a xorg.conf file is and how to reset it from the console.
You screwed up your computer and needed to access another system to figure out how to fix it? Yes, that happens on Windows too. Like the time I installed a wireless driver that was "Designed for Windows XP", apparently it was made for pre-sp1 WinXP installs and on XP SP2, it would cause the system to bluescreen on boot. Go into safe mode to uninstall it and the uninstaller refused to work because it was in safe mode - Can't use safe mode with networking because that would load the driver and bluescreen the system to find the information. Happy? I just gave you a pretty similar scenario I experienced under Windows.
And how the hell should a newcomer know what package to install to make websites look more natural?
It's described on/by google, wikis, documentation and volunteers, so I don't think the user will have so much grief finding out when you consider there are far harder tasks on Windows. Such as, finding out why your.avi file won't play. What it doesn't have a codec? What codec? How do I find out what codec it requires? Where do I get this codec? I installed divx pro and now I have adware on my system etc.
The average home user who isn't a "hobbyist" or "enthusiast" or whatever they're calling us geeks nowadays doesn't give a shit about Ubuntu/Debian/GNU's (or is that GNUbuntu? I'd have to ask Stallman) ideological stances about purity and the evils of proprietary code. They want their video card to work. They want an operating system that will replace the headaches they get working with Windows, not a new religion. There's no convincing reason an OS that claims to want to appeal to the average user shouldn't install these things by default.
The average home user buys the OS already installed on the computer, including Linux systems which don't have this issue.
You think Ubuntu is hard from scratch for a average home user? You should see how much hell home users go through trying to do something as simple as finding out what hardware they have in their computer, because Windows won't tell them so they can't figure out what drivers they need and Windows provide the drivers, the video and audio codecs, updated applications for things like pdf, Java etc. This problem is made worse further by the fact that big OEMs like Dell, Sony etc. market computers with different hardware combinations under the same name - thus the user finds the wrong hardware information.
Mean while, on Ubuntu, all they have to do is hit a few check boxes and install "ubuntu-restricted-extras" from add/remove software - which hinted all over Google, wikis and documentation (thus the user won't have too much of an issue figuring it out compared to Windows).
Additionally, Ubuntu has nothing to do with "ideological stances about purity", things like Microsoft's core web fonts are not available for license in anything else other than seperate distribution on the web, thus the only way to get around that is to offer the ability to install the software from the web after the OS is installed.
There's no convincing reason an OS that claims to want to appeal to the average user shouldn't install these things by default.
It's nice to be able to just click a button. Though I had to click it about 6 times to get it to do anything. Once installed Ubuntu decided to start doing crazy things like set the refresh rate to 50 or 53Hz. I spent ages trying to get a decent resolution and refresh rate with no success. I gave up once I managed to get 800x600@60Hz.
What hardware are you using that is unsupported to a point that you can only get it working with t 800x600@60Hz?
I didn't think there was even unsupported hardware like that, hardware that doesn't support even XVGA - amazing.
Kubuntu decided to uninstall the Nvidia sound drivers for no reason and I could not get pulse to work.
I can't even figure out how you pulled that off unless you were messing with restricted kernel packages in a non-standard fashion and thus, did not install the linux-restricted-modules meta package, which would mean when you update the kernel, it would not install the updated restricted kernel modules and would look like to you then that Kubuntu uninstalled the drivers when in actual fact it just didn't install the modules for the latest kernel it's booting off. This would not happen in normal circumstances.
Configuring windows shares is STILL a nightmare, all I want to do is share some folders through windows workgroup.
Worked for me (TM)
have given up and will install windows 2000 tonight.
You should install a supported operating system like Windows Vista. Installing older versions of Windows that are no longer supported is plain silly.
Why isn't this installed by default? Seriously - disk space and memory is not a premium anymore.
The licenses on the software prevents it from being packaged with the distribution.
Why isn't this installed by default? If it detects an NVidia video card - install them!
It gives you an option usually of which nvidia drivers to install - This is mainly for the same reason why you would have different versions available to you under Windows, certain driver versions are screwy with your hardware, doesn't matter if you're on Windows or Linux.
I don't really get why this is important either, it's not like Windows is any easier. When you consider that Windows doesn't come with really any hardware support (no drivers), the majority of drivers will be missing for your system and Windows won't even suggest where to get to get the drivers, never mind the fact that Windows won't even identify the hardware to you (what model do I have?). It's the same with video, audio codecs etc. Meanwhile on Ubuntu, all you do is hit a checkbox for a driver and install ubuntu-restricted-extras to get a standard install (flash, microsoft fonts, java, codecs etc). Of course, if I was giving this to a new Linux user, I would have installed it myself and everything would of been preconfigured like any Windows system I tech would do.
In all honesty, what the hell are people complaining about? Windows goes about this even worse.
1.) Why should you have to? Sometimes the linux community seems to forget that It's not always "is it easy?", but should I have to. I understand the reasoning, but does granny or Bob the guy who runs a landscape company? Probably not.
It's a "checkbox", literally. Why? It tells you why.
2.) Another instance of something you shouldn't have to do even if it's for the same reason as #1. If they are making 28mil (as quoted above) then perhaps buying the licenses needed would be better (if plausible) ?
They can't license the stuff in ubuntu-restricted-extras, that's why it's there, to get around the fact it cannot be prepackaged with the system.
It's hard to explain to someone who calls Internet Explorer the internet that they just need to install a new package from the add/remove software or open a terminal and sudo apt-get.
No it isn't, I have helped such people over the phone install Ubuntu - I'm speaking from prior experience.
4.) It's all first impressions. Ever go to a restaurant and get really crappy food and poor service then go back to it a while later to try it again?
Do you understand why I get annoyed with Windows when I install it then? The partition manager is crap, the bootloader doesn't support other operating systems, the drivers which are just a checkbox away on Ubuntu require me to locate the website, the exact model - Because oh my God, Windows can't even tell me what hardware I've got installed... And you want to tell me that the first impressions of Ubuntu are wrong? It's annoying to find all the codecs and software that the average system has. On Ubuntu I just install ubuntu-restricted-extras and tick a few checkboxes - Windows is far, far worse.
Of course, the majority of Ubuntu systems I give people have been already fully installed and configured like when they get a Windows system from a tech - thus none of these issues are really relevant to begin with, but hey, let's keep dwelling on stupid things that aren't true.
1. NVIDIA graphics card drivers weren't installed because they were proprietary. Come on. Even then, dragging windows around and typing into text boxes had a minor delay that didn't feel natural.
Ubuntu offered to install those for me after starting up the system, I clicked a checkbox and it was installed - no issue.
2. All websites looked different and ugly as sin, because the package didn't come with the fonts that every other system used. Come on!
ubuntu-restricted-extras is rather easy to install.
setting up a hotkey to send a window to the other monitor, etc.
There is a hotkey to do this on Windows? Please tell me what it is, because I have been getting very irritated recently with win7's multi monitor support.
I installed Ubuntu for the first time last year, and man, I was disappointed.
You know, I don't see why this was modded troll. The guy brings up a pretty good point. It's one of the reasons why other operating systems have problems competing against Windows. People get Windows for "free" (pirate) or are forced to have it included with their computer, since the system is out there on a mass scale, there is mass interest in it and even if you make your software legally free, people aren't interested because they can get Windows for the same price.
Ease of updates. I gotta say console games are insanely easier to update than pc games. Maybe not for the developer, but definitely for the end user.
If the developer can't update the game because say... Microsoft won't let them without a costly affair, requiring updates to be 10MB in size, not allowing additional content for free etc. While on PC the developer can. How does it make it easier for the user? The user can't update because there are no updates available.
Some PC games are that way. Some have the courtesy to at least tell you there's an update, but you still gotta go to the website, download the patch, and install it. Others don't even tell you. You just wonder why you can't connect to any servers.
I get all my games off Steam. Other people are free to use this method too. With the PC you have a choice on how you get your games, updates etc. So, I don't really see this as an issue. If the user doesn't want a specific thing on the PC or wants a specific thing, the user can choose.
there is no real reason these aren't available more on consoles nowadays.
Having to pay something like £90/year just to us a dev kit and then requiring certification that you need to pay for if you want to make it public seems like a pretty good real reason to me.
these are actually easier on consoles nowadays. although steam made pc's catch up on this.
I don't see how, VALVe can't update TF2 because Microsoft won't let them without a costly affair, requiring updates to be 10MB in size, not allowing additional content for free etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Probably the same consequence of letting 12 year old boy play a first person shooter that involves killing people in bloody violence.
In other words, nothing for the vast majority.
Actually, those were just incomplete operating systems in my opinion, lacking important things like proper 2d and 3d acceleration, and then releasing it in the next version as it goes on, APIs not properly coded, so it gets rewritten, changed as the versions go on while introducing more crappy stuff.
To put it simply, they put out a shitty product initially and are now fixing it.
Steve Jobs talks about how adding something like Quartz 2D extreme (they renamed it to QuartzGL for some reason later on) is the future and then because it's such a shoddy piece of crap, end up disabling it in 10.4 due to the instability and apparently worse performance it brings...
I would not use Apple as a good example of Page's Law.
Considering how much backwards compatibility and APIs Apple keep breaking -- I doubt it.
The problem is, any time you modify the original game content and decide to sell it stores, you have to get the game rerated by the BBFC and ESRB. It's often the cause as to why developers and publishers just provide updates on their website, rather than integrating the updates with the published discs.
I have, it seems to depend on the child really.
Don't you know that the bird is the word?
Since you asked in short, the answer is - Yes.
Why would a average Joe user install Linux? He would buy a computer with Linux.
Not my company. But, I don't think telling them will do anything.
I don't think I'd be able to access the sites from IBM PPC systems running Linux anymore, some how.
Thanks for trying to help.
Fortunately they have got a Russian on board the space station.
"This is how we fix things on Russian space station!" --Lev Andropov
(He then proceeds to take a hammer and whack the equipment.)
Serious question, has the Apache package even had any bad vulnerabilities like this in the past ten years?
That's not really busy in my opinion. 3-5 security updates a month is nothing to be impressed by and it doesn't tell me if they fix all their vulnerabilities, which as we all know, they haven't.
You know, I've managed an OS X server before, you can't fool me. Considering how they almost don't issue an security update for the entire duration of the server release is pretty scary.
I've also had OS X on my desktop before and I've seen how Apple pretty much just ignores low profile security issues with the opensource software they use, from Samba to CUPS. Often including the updates in the next 'major' version of OS X. Meanwhile, Linux distributions get it patched practically next day.
No, I'm not impressed.
Try Noscript.
First things I noticed after disabling it, restarting Firefox with my saved tabs:
At this point I got annoyed and turned Java back on.
From another post I did on the same thread since you can't read:
The average home user buys the OS already installed on the computer, including Linux systems which don't have this issue.
You think Ubuntu is hard from scratch for a average home user? You should see how much hell home users go through trying to do something as simple as finding out what hardware they have in their computer, because Windows won't tell them so they can't figure out what drivers they need and Windows provide the drivers, the video and audio codecs, updated applications for things like pdf, Java etc. This problem is made worse further by the fact that big OEMs like Dell, Sony etc. market computers with different hardware combinations under the same name - thus the user finds the wrong hardware information.
From the same post:
Mean while, on Ubuntu, all they have to do is hit a few check boxes and install "ubuntu-restricted-extras" from add/remove software - which hinted all over Google, wikis and documentation (thus the user won't have too much of an issue figuring it out compared to Windows).
The add/remove software icon in the main menu, it's even one of the most visible packages when you start it up.
It isn't. Things like Microsoft's fonts cannot be packaged with Ubuntu legally. The license states it must be redistributed as it's own, unmodified, solo package. Thus Ubuntu gets around that by installing the liberty fonts which are in my opinion a very good replacement for the fonts and offer the ability to download Microsoft's fonts for you.
Why do you think I would behave the way I do on #Ubuntu here? This isn't a help channel. Seriously, are you that thick that you assume people will behave like they do at church, at a football game etc?
Don't answer that question, it's rhetorical.
I can already do that in Firefox.
No, I realize how hard it is for the average user, which can be seen in my previous posts.
You screwed up your computer and needed to access another system to figure out how to fix it? Yes, that happens on Windows too. Like the time I installed a wireless driver that was "Designed for Windows XP", apparently it was made for pre-sp1 WinXP installs and on XP SP2, it would cause the system to bluescreen on boot. Go into safe mode to uninstall it and the uninstaller refused to work because it was in safe mode - Can't use safe mode with networking because that would load the driver and bluescreen the system to find the information. Happy? I just gave you a pretty similar scenario I experienced under Windows.
It's described on/by google, wikis, documentation and volunteers, so I don't think the user will have so much grief finding out when you consider there are far harder tasks on Windows. Such as, finding out why your .avi file won't play. What it doesn't have a codec? What codec? How do I find out what codec it requires? Where do I get this codec? I installed divx pro and now I have adware on my system etc.
The average home user buys the OS already installed on the computer, including Linux systems which don't have this issue.
You think Ubuntu is hard from scratch for a average home user? You should see how much hell home users go through trying to do something as simple as finding out what hardware they have in their computer, because Windows won't tell them so they can't figure out what drivers they need and Windows provide the drivers, the video and audio codecs, updated applications for things like pdf, Java etc. This problem is made worse further by the fact that big OEMs like Dell, Sony etc. market computers with different hardware combinations under the same name - thus the user finds the wrong hardware information.
Mean while, on Ubuntu, all they have to do is hit a few check boxes and install "ubuntu-restricted-extras" from add/remove software - which hinted all over Google, wikis and documentation (thus the user won't have too much of an issue figuring it out compared to Windows).
Additionally, Ubuntu has nothing to do with "ideological stances about purity", things like Microsoft's core web fonts are not available for license in anything else other than seperate distribution on the web, thus the only way to get around that is to offer the ability to install the software from the web after the OS is installed.
Legal reasons seem pretty convincing to me.
What hardware are you using that is unsupported to a point that you can only get it working with t 800x600@60Hz?
I didn't think there was even unsupported hardware like that, hardware that doesn't support even XVGA - amazing.
I can't even figure out how you pulled that off unless you were messing with restricted kernel packages in a non-standard fashion and thus, did not install the linux-restricted-modules meta package, which would mean when you update the kernel, it would not install the updated restricted kernel modules and would look like to you then that Kubuntu uninstalled the drivers when in actual fact it just didn't install the modules for the latest kernel it's booting off. This would not happen in normal circumstances.
Worked for me (TM)
You should install a supported operating system like Windows Vista. Installing older versions of Windows that are no longer supported is plain silly.
The licenses on the software prevents it from being packaged with the distribution.
It gives you an option usually of which nvidia drivers to install - This is mainly for the same reason why you would have different versions available to you under Windows, certain driver versions are screwy with your hardware, doesn't matter if you're on Windows or Linux.
I don't really get why this is important either, it's not like Windows is any easier. When you consider that Windows doesn't come with really any hardware support (no drivers), the majority of drivers will be missing for your system and Windows won't even suggest where to get to get the drivers, never mind the fact that Windows won't even identify the hardware to you (what model do I have?). It's the same with video, audio codecs etc. Meanwhile on Ubuntu, all you do is hit a checkbox for a driver and install ubuntu-restricted-extras to get a standard install (flash, microsoft fonts, java, codecs etc). Of course, if I was giving this to a new Linux user, I would have installed it myself and everything would of been preconfigured like any Windows system I tech would do.
In all honesty, what the hell are people complaining about? Windows goes about this even worse.
1.) Why should you have to? Sometimes the linux community seems to forget that It's not always "is it easy?", but should I have to. I understand the reasoning, but does granny or Bob the guy who runs a landscape company? Probably not.
It's a "checkbox", literally. Why? It tells you why.
They can't license the stuff in ubuntu-restricted-extras, that's why it's there, to get around the fact it cannot be prepackaged with the system.
No it isn't, I have helped such people over the phone install Ubuntu - I'm speaking from prior experience.
Do you understand why I get annoyed with Windows when I install it then? The partition manager is crap, the bootloader doesn't support other operating systems, the drivers which are just a checkbox away on Ubuntu require me to locate the website, the exact model - Because oh my God, Windows can't even tell me what hardware I've got installed... And you want to tell me that the first impressions of Ubuntu are wrong? It's annoying to find all the codecs and software that the average system has. On Ubuntu I just install ubuntu-restricted-extras and tick a few checkboxes - Windows is far, far worse.
Of course, the majority of Ubuntu systems I give people have been already fully installed and configured like when they get a Windows system from a tech - thus none of these issues are really relevant to begin with, but hey, let's keep dwelling on stupid things that aren't true.
Ubuntu offered to install those for me after starting up the system, I clicked a checkbox and it was installed - no issue.
ubuntu-restricted-extras is rather easy to install.
There is a hotkey to do this on Windows? Please tell me what it is, because I have been getting very irritated recently with win7's multi monitor support.
I'm sceptical after you mentioned point one.
You know, I don't see why this was modded troll. The guy brings up a pretty good point. It's one of the reasons why other operating systems have problems competing against Windows. People get Windows for "free" (pirate) or are forced to have it included with their computer, since the system is out there on a mass scale, there is mass interest in it and even if you make your software legally free, people aren't interested because they can get Windows for the same price.
If the developer can't update the game because say... Microsoft won't let them without a costly affair, requiring updates to be 10MB in size, not allowing additional content for free etc. While on PC the developer can. How does it make it easier for the user? The user can't update because there are no updates available.
I get all my games off Steam. Other people are free to use this method too. With the PC you have a choice on how you get your games, updates etc. So, I don't really see this as an issue. If the user doesn't want a specific thing on the PC or wants a specific thing, the user can choose.
Having to pay something like £90/year just to us a dev kit and then requiring certification that you need to pay for if you want to make it public seems like a pretty good real reason to me.
I don't see how, VALVe can't update TF2 because Microsoft won't let them without a costly affair, requiring updates to be 10MB in size, not allowing additional content for free etc.