If that was true, nobody would be running Linux, because to a first approximation zero percent of all PCs come with Linux installed.
The amount of users that run non-Windows operating systems tend to be insignificant statistics wise. The decision making used by the small amount of users in this area does not represent the majority of users at all.
For long enough for it to matter, falling further and further behind the Linux "we don't maintain a stable API, sometimes we break it deliberately" kernel?
I recall a German linux distribution called Roboter that did this (went dead about three years ago) and another one, which was a Polish made distribution called Sciana.
Dude, I've been looking for a NeXT-style linux distro for 15 years. I've got the original GNUstep CD, the one that was just source code and libraries, right here... from 1996. It never evolved into a distro.
OK, fine, you live in the world where a 5 year old driver works on a current version of Linux, or a new driver works on a 5 year old version of Linux, but my Wintendo using current cards in a 10 year old version of Windows is impossible, and where people didn't get totally pissed off because Vista broke because their video card or sound card.
I'd love to visit it.
People don't upgrade their operating systems, unless the operating system offers to itself. They get a new computer with a new operating system.
And I don't even know what you mean by "Some had a idea of using a kernel and having stable ABI/APIs like Windows/OS X etc." because the kernel APIs aren't up to the distro, they're up to the Linux kernel guys. That would be "Imaginary Linux", yesno?
Some past distributions maintained their own kernel forks, where they just implemented bug fixes and updated just a few components, retaining a stable ABI/API.
I guess these distros that you're talking about that were exactly like NeXTstep and OS X are imaginary too. It's for sure that I haven't seen one. And I've been looking.
Nope, they just died due to lack of volunteers and interest rather quickly. It's been a few years since I've seen one.
And dkms doesn't deal with the fact that the Linux kernel APIs (let alone the ABIs) are deliberately not kept stable, so any driver has a restricted window in which it will work.
They don't change the APIs that drastically or often in the kernel and when they do break things, it's not as often as Windows does between versions.
Manu of the user-visible problems in Vista were due to Microsoft changing the driver API for the first time since Windows 2000, and that's been one of the things that's sold people on risking the switch to Linux or OS X.
Microsoft introduced changes to the kernel API in Windows 2000 with service packs that broke graphics support partially until there were new drivers, Windows XP with wireless and graphics, Windows XP SP1 with memory addressing changes in the kernel that broke drivers, Windows SP2 another set of Windows addressing changes with DEP and wireless API changes.
that's been one of the things that's sold people on risking the switch to Linux or OS X.
No it hasn't. I think that's one of the last reasons why people would be using Windows since people don't even know this stuff to begin with. General people don't use a OS for technical merit at all.
I'm running Windows 2000 on my Wintendo. That was released in 1999, and hasn't been supported in years, but apart from Bluetooth devices pretty much every third party driver has Just Worked.
Wouldn't work with my Wacom.
Would a 5 year old Linux system work with a driver released in 2008?
Sure
What would you need to do to make it work?
The only experience I have with this, was with a Slackware install and wireless almost a year ago, I was lazy and grabbed a new kernel off http://www.kernel.org/ and some libraries I knew I didn't have with the wireless driver pack from http://linuxwireless.org/. Compiled, installed, done (really just typing./configure, make, make install a lot with each thing).
Looking at GoboLinux, it doesn't look even vaguely similar to the NeXTstep style bundles in OS X. It's a linkfarm model, which is also a useful approach, but it's not what I'm talking about.
As I've said, there were some distributions even far closer to doing everything the OS X way, but after a couple of years they simply died out because of lack of interest. Some had a idea of using a kernel and having stable ABI/APIs like Windows/OS X etc.
Just goes to show how that model really mattered to users.
OK, let's say Wacom comes out with a new tablet and wants to include Linux support, here's how the user experience is going to be:
Windows: insert the CD (doubleclick on autorun.exe if you have autorun turned off), click "OK" on the license, plug in your tablet.
Mac: insert the CD and doubleclick on the driver.pkg file, slick "OK" on the license, plug in your tablet.
Linux: If you're using the latest version of Ubuntu, su to root then run "setup.sh" in a terminal. If that fails, follow the Debian instructions below.
If you have a Red Hat or SUSE System, open up a terminal and type "rpm -gibberish", unless it's RHEL X.Y or later, in which case you run "yum -gibberish". If you have a kernel older than 2.Y, you need to upgrade to 2.Z, then run "yum -gibberish". If you're using Fedora, you need to use this other gibberish.
If you're using a Debian system, run "dpkg -gibberish", unless it's Ubuntu later than A.B or "Freaky Comet", then you don't need to install the drivers, except for E, F, and G... you need to run THIS install script and
Here is my experience with brand new wacom tablet devices: I just plugged it in and it immediately worked under Linux.
Additionally, proprietary driver installation is handled by 'restricted-drivers', a tray application that will popup offering to install the drivers for you to get it working, all you have to do is check a checkbox. in the Ubuntu series of Linuxes. Mandriva has something very similar, but I forgot the name of the application (not that it's important to know, since it pops up automatically).
These have nothing to do with package management.
If you're using an EeePC, rotsa ruck.
I use Kubuntu intrepid on my EeePC 701 (was easier than installing Windows on it).
And that's assuming Wacom's willing to include 14 different sets of RPMs and DEBs for the most recent release of a half dozen of the most popular Linux distros.
So, why couldn't wacom use dkms again if they released a proprietary driver that distributions didn't have? It would work with all major desktop distributions just fine.
I've been looking for one like that. Haven't found one yet. URL?
Currently, the last remaining one that uses packaging similar (although not as movable like on OS X), http://www.gobolinux.org/ (the others which were closer to it, simply died from lack of interest - their websites are even gone).
You know I'm right: there is no consumer Linux desktop market to speak of
Perhaps not, because many people get their Linux distros for free rather than purchasing it - hence not consumers/market share data. There are however a overwhelming huge amount of Linux users outside of the States. I've personally seen more Linux desktops than Mac desktops with my travels all around Europe.
almost all Linux installations are developers or servers.
Considering how I've seen so many people with Linux netbooks, Linux handhelds and Linux mini desktops -- I disagree.
Until the Linux kernel bods settle on stable ABIs for drivers
There is already support for this, it is however unused - when there is stuff like DKMS, why bother? When proper distributions (and I'm not talking about community development project distros like OpenSuSE, Fedora which only serve to build a better commercial distro under a different name, but ones like Ubuntu, Mandriva) include all the necessary drivers and upto date compiled drivers when the system is updated (while still have the option of using DKMS for those unfortunate instances).
some distro goes to a package system that doesn't depend on musical repositories (maybe something based on GNUstep) that's not going to change.
I see nothing wrong with package management on Linux OSes. If you do, feel free to give input.
However, take note that there are many Linux distributions and some have implemented different packaging models (including those implementing ones similar to OS X), they didn't become any more popular than niche things because they really didn't provide that much more to the user.
I am not interested in ZFS when I already have RAID/LVM (and ZFS if I use FUSE). dtrace, while a interesting debugger doesn't exaclty do enough to encourage me to just dump my current debugging software, operating system, filesystems, vast repositories for Solaris.
What about updating stuff like crontab to support simple things like @reboot, 5/*? The amount of backwards stuff in Solaris just makes administration more difficult.
Also, part of the reason I use ALAC instead of FLAC is because ALAC will allow you to embed music covers in a song while FLAC won't.
Just a interesting note, ALAC does not support replaygain volume normalisation, FLAC does.
The latest version of Xine supports m4a/ALAC files just fine (it works here in Kubuntu Intrepid). If you are using the latest version of Xine, you may not of had ALAC enabled at compile time (don't ask me why someone would of disabled it), it should work fine in K3B.
I often see people surprised with this way of copying a directory tree to a remote host without a temporary copy. This is much faster than scp -p for large directory trees.
tar cf -/foo/src | ssh remote "(cd/bar; tar xf -)"
Additionally, if you use the -C prefix in ssh, you enable compression along the way. Which is great when working over the Internet.
The post related to UNIX. try running your commands on a UNIX shell you will notice there is a difference.
Indeed, it incredibly sucks on SCO UNIX. Grep command has no recursive search, tar has no gzip capability, crontab doesn't have the ability to use @reboot, */5 etc.
Used PPC Macs are still selling well. In fact a used G5 or G4 is pretty much the only entry-level Mac option.
Used Amigas still sell quite well too. What is your point?
The user base is diminishing. There are still people developing for the Amiga even now, some people still using it, but most people aren't and when it comes to Mac users, it's the same thing.
You're just going to have accept that the platform is now obsolete and the user base can never grow again.
You've stuck yourself into a niche before you even got to your argument. Seriously, half the music stores around here don't even HAVE a classical section. I'm not disparaging your taste in music, but to claim iTunes is a poor music player because it doesn't handle a niche market as intelligently as it could is just being intellectually dishonest.
Amarok does it, Song bird does it, Winamp does it.
You asked me how it sorted, it sorts poorly.
Additionally, saying classical music is a niche is incredibly ridicules considering the amount of radio stations, television channels etc. that exist for it.
GCC fixes also benefit everyone. A bugfix is a bugfix, a feature is a feature. Apple doesn't ONLY have platform specific fixes, they contribute to ARM, PPC, and Intel compiler optimizations, they support the C++, C, and Objective C interfaces, and yes, they do compile to the Mach interface.
Optimizations and features for Mach are really platform specific to OS X.
CUPS is hardly platform specific. Apple didn't adopt it until 2002, when it was already 5 years old. It is available on GNOME, KDE, Mandrake, and RedHat, among others.
They code they contribute is specific for it to run on OS X.
Of course, I won't deny that they fixed a few trivial bugs discovered.
Do you think Apple deploys these programs without testing?
Let's see.. I've had broken Samba (My God, the amount of issues while Samba on Linux distros was fine was simply baffling), broken CUPS, broken Apache (the bug that only allowed it to send the first 15KB of a file was hilarious - it took them a major OS X server release to fix it), broken Squirrel mail (because they shipped the only version of PHP with OS X server that didn't work with Squirrel mail that they ship with OS X server). Remember Finder?
Never mind how OpenGL is broken (so many bugs that can cause lock ups, artifacts), POSIX threads are broken, 64bit development is broken (can't do it unless you use obj-c and cocoa for 64bit), signaling is broken etc.
Are you sure you use OS X? I have. Have you even developed on OS X? I have. Did you even look at what Apple has contributed back? I have.
Agreed and this is my primary reason moving to the Mac. How well a GUI is laid out and how well it looks is a BIG deal to me. Believe it or not, it really helps me to keep moving on an otherwise very boring project.
Oh, like: KHTML->WebKit->Safari/Chrome/S60 browser? So this is clearly Linux->Apple->back to Linux!
That's a rather weak argument considering the S60 browser is for a locked down platform (like TiVo) which does not work for FOSS usage.
Then the fact that they contribute to GCC
Oh great, Mach binary support (platform specific for OS X). Just what the opensource community needs. The ability to compile to a binary format that doesn't run on any of the major opensource platforms.
Apache
Platform specific stuff for OS X
CUPS?
Platform specific stuff for OS X
BSD (as in Darwin source), etc
How is Darwin useful? Seriously, nobody uses it and it has outdated utilities and a crappy kernel called "XNU" that can't even handle POSIX threads correctly.
They are excellent Unix machines with a great, smooth UI, which is why they've found favour with programmers and Unix people.
First of all: XNU is not UNIX (Apple named XNU this).
Secondly: Windows' POSIX subsystem also passes all the certifications that OS X does. Windows also has some BSD code.
Does this make Windows, UNIX too?
Thirdly, beyond x-code, OS X doesn't really have much going for it programming wise. I mean, we've got broken standard libraries, broken POSIX threads, broken 64bit support (try making a 64bit application on OS X without coca or obj-c) and if you don't believe me, Google it.
It's because of pricks like you spouting this trash, that I got involved with OS X and I hate so many things about the OS. From the primitive UI, animations you can't turn off to basic OS features.
And as for Amarok... I don't know how much "sexy" there was in there previously, but if I was willing to put up with this sort of mess, I wouldn't be using a mac in the first place
But found the interface chunky and slow. It uses twice the RAM of iTunes and sounds like crap (when playing the same file in both).
Amarok is currently taking 6MB memory (rest of it is shared memory with KDE) on it's own here, with a playlist of 5300 songs, playing the music, obtaining the lyrics automatically, displaying the album art -- oh and with moodbar functionality!
Slashdot Mirror
I wouldn't rely on information from a article that gets simple things wrong, such as:
The majority of routers do not typically run Linux or BSD.
Where is the logic bomb?
The amount of users that run non-Windows operating systems tend to be insignificant statistics wise. The decision making used by the small amount of users in this area does not represent the majority of users at all.
I recall a German linux distribution called Roboter that did this (went dead about three years ago) and another one, which was a Polish made distribution called Sciana.
It did, it's just such a horrible thing to install, http://io.debian.net/~tar/gnustep/install.txt
Oolite-Linux (made for the Elite recreation called oolite).
People don't upgrade their operating systems, unless the operating system offers to itself. They get a new computer with a new operating system.
Some past distributions maintained their own kernel forks, where they just implemented bug fixes and updated just a few components, retaining a stable ABI/API.
Nope, they just died due to lack of volunteers and interest rather quickly. It's been a few years since I've seen one.
They don't change the APIs that drastically or often in the kernel and when they do break things, it's not as often as Windows does between versions.
Microsoft introduced changes to the kernel API in Windows 2000 with service packs that broke graphics support partially until there were new drivers, Windows XP with wireless and graphics, Windows XP SP1 with memory addressing changes in the kernel that broke drivers, Windows SP2 another set of Windows addressing changes with DEP and wireless API changes.
No it hasn't. I think that's one of the last reasons why people would be using Windows since people don't even know this stuff to begin with. General people don't use a OS for technical merit at all.
Wouldn't work with my Wacom.
Sure
The only experience I have with this, was with a Slackware install and wireless almost a year ago, I was lazy and grabbed a new kernel off http://www.kernel.org/ and some libraries I knew I didn't have with the wireless driver pack from http://linuxwireless.org/. Compiled, installed, done (really just typing ./configure, make, make install a lot with each thing).
As I've said, there were some distributions even far closer to doing everything the OS X way, but after a couple of years they simply died out because of lack of interest. Some had a idea of using a kernel and having stable ABI/APIs like Windows/OS X etc.
Just goes to show how that model really mattered to users.
Except sox is not installed by default like arecord, aplay is in most distributions.
Or don't specify it like I did.
What about the nVidia Tesla?
Here is my experience with brand new wacom tablet devices: I just plugged it in and it immediately worked under Linux.
Additionally, proprietary driver installation is handled by 'restricted-drivers', a tray application that will popup offering to install the drivers for you to get it working, all you have to do is check a checkbox. in the Ubuntu series of Linuxes. Mandriva has something very similar, but I forgot the name of the application (not that it's important to know, since it pops up automatically).
These have nothing to do with package management.
I use Kubuntu intrepid on my EeePC 701 (was easier than installing Windows on it).
So, why couldn't wacom use dkms again if they released a proprietary driver that distributions didn't have? It would work with all major desktop distributions just fine.
Currently, the last remaining one that uses packaging similar (although not as movable like on OS X), http://www.gobolinux.org/ (the others which were closer to it, simply died from lack of interest - their websites are even gone).
Perhaps not, because many people get their Linux distros for free rather than purchasing it - hence not consumers/market share data. There are however a overwhelming huge amount of Linux users outside of the States. I've personally seen more Linux desktops than Mac desktops with my travels all around Europe.
Considering how I've seen so many people with Linux netbooks, Linux handhelds and Linux mini desktops -- I disagree.
There is already support for this, it is however unused - when there is stuff like DKMS, why bother? When proper distributions (and I'm not talking about community development project distros like OpenSuSE, Fedora which only serve to build a better commercial distro under a different name, but ones like Ubuntu, Mandriva) include all the necessary drivers and upto date compiled drivers when the system is updated (while still have the option of using DKMS for those unfortunate instances).
I see nothing wrong with package management on Linux OSes. If you do, feel free to give input.
However, take note that there are many Linux distributions and some have implemented different packaging models (including those implementing ones similar to OS X), they didn't become any more popular than niche things because they really didn't provide that much more to the user.
Seriously, can we have something new already?
I am not interested in ZFS when I already have RAID/LVM (and ZFS if I use FUSE). dtrace, while a interesting debugger doesn't exaclty do enough to encourage me to just dump my current debugging software, operating system, filesystems, vast repositories for Solaris.
What about updating stuff like crontab to support simple things like @reboot, 5/*? The amount of backwards stuff in Solaris just makes administration more difficult.
I sold my Amiga 1200 last week for £120.
Nobody has yet been able to provide me with realistic figures yet on Mac/Linux/Windows users, so I'm dismissing this comment.
The difference between Linux and Mac PPC is that the Linux user base is growing.
Just a interesting note, ALAC does not support replaygain volume normalisation, FLAC does.
The latest version of Xine supports m4a/ALAC files just fine (it works here in Kubuntu Intrepid). If you are using the latest version of Xine, you may not of had ALAC enabled at compile time (don't ask me why someone would of disabled it), it should work fine in K3B.
I am, I am using superior players than iTunes, which are designed for just music.
Not a mix-match bloated patch work of music, video and mobile phone patching utilities while having a store integrated into it.
Additionally, if you use the -C prefix in ssh, you enable compression along the way. Which is great when working over the Internet.
Indeed, it incredibly sucks on SCO UNIX. Grep command has no recursive search, tar has no gzip capability, crontab doesn't have the ability to use @reboot, */5 etc.
In summary: SCO Unix sucks compared to Linux.
Used Amigas still sell quite well too. What is your point?
The user base is diminishing. There are still people developing for the Amiga even now, some people still using it, but most people aren't and when it comes to Mac users, it's the same thing.
You're just going to have accept that the platform is now obsolete and the user base can never grow again.
Amarok does it, Song bird does it, Winamp does it.
You asked me how it sorted, it sorts poorly.
Additionally, saying classical music is a niche is incredibly ridicules considering the amount of radio stations, television channels etc. that exist for it.
Optimizations and features for Mach are really platform specific to OS X.
They code they contribute is specific for it to run on OS X.
Of course, I won't deny that they fixed a few trivial bugs discovered.
Let's see.. I've had broken Samba (My God, the amount of issues while Samba on Linux distros was fine was simply baffling), broken CUPS, broken Apache (the bug that only allowed it to send the first 15KB of a file was hilarious - it took them a major OS X server release to fix it), broken Squirrel mail (because they shipped the only version of PHP with OS X server that didn't work with Squirrel mail that they ship with OS X server). Remember Finder?
Never mind how OpenGL is broken (so many bugs that can cause lock ups, artifacts), POSIX threads are broken, 64bit development is broken (can't do it unless you use obj-c and cocoa for 64bit), signaling is broken etc.
Are you sure you use OS X? I have.
Have you even developed on OS X? I have.
Did you even look at what Apple has contributed back? I have.
That's back in fashion? Sounds so 90s to me...
As long as these GUIs do not help in the creation of WMDs.
That's a rather weak argument considering the S60 browser is for a locked down platform (like TiVo) which does not work for FOSS usage.
Oh great, Mach binary support (platform specific for OS X). Just what the opensource community needs. The ability to compile to a binary format that doesn't run on any of the major opensource platforms.
Platform specific stuff for OS X
Platform specific stuff for OS X
How is Darwin useful? Seriously, nobody uses it and it has outdated utilities and a crappy kernel called "XNU" that can't even handle POSIX threads correctly.
You call this, giving back to the community?
First of all: XNU is not UNIX (Apple named XNU this).
Secondly: Windows' POSIX subsystem also passes all the certifications that OS X does. Windows also has some BSD code.
Does this make Windows, UNIX too?
Thirdly, beyond x-code, OS X doesn't really have much going for it programming wise. I mean, we've got broken standard libraries, broken POSIX threads, broken 64bit support (try making a 64bit application on OS X without coca or obj-c) and if you don't believe me, Google it.
It's because of pricks like you spouting this trash, that I got involved with OS X and I hate so many things about the OS. From the primitive UI, animations you can't turn off to basic OS features.
Me neither. Fortunately my Amarok looks nothing like that.
Amarok is currently taking 6MB memory (rest of it is shared memory with KDE) on it's own here, with a playlist of 5300 songs, playing the music, obtaining the lyrics automatically, displaying the album art -- oh and with moodbar functionality!