I might have gone down a slightly different route, but certainly not screwed my entire argument.
I do find it interesting how soon after you do this post, I see that I've been modded down in another article suddenly. Somehow I don't think that was a coincidence.
Then shut up about this not being a help forum and you not having to help someone.
If someone complains that something sucks in a help channnel on IRC -- I'm more likely to actually see if they need help with it than debate the fact. So yes, this is very relevant.
Then you try and change the whole issue in this post: What was the specific lie in the original article/the original post that you're complaining about now?
Just admit that the whole purpose in FOSS community software is to use the talents of the masses to make software better.
Richard Stallman thinks one of the purposes of FOSS software is not run into issues people cannot fix, like Richard Stallman and his printer many years ago.
That's not too wide a generalization for you is it?
Yeah, it is pretty much.
There are many reasons than just this for FOSS software, and this reason probably doesn't apply to everyone.
There are those who believe software should be free in general, hence FOSS. Others who believe FOSS is good for a security point of view (many eyes). There are those who believe other things too. And, if you want to know my stance... There are people like me, who in particular just like FOSS because we see it as superior, but don't care really too much for any philosophy it's connected too, the only reason why it's (in the group which believe this) used is because it's viewed as technically superior.
These things in your opinion are generalizations when the conclusion that people could possibly look at problems others face as possible issues instead of just dismissing them as user stupidity and pointing at the competition and whining that "They don't do it better so why should we try? They don't help the user, they make them dumber, stupid Windoze Loser"
And you have completely ignored my argument from earlier. I do not go into a car mechanics area, trying to show that I know all about cars (when I don't) then giving bad facts and bad opinions to said group. I certainly wouldn't expect the mechanics to just offer me help on the issue as much as debate me on the facts.
What the hell good are you to the world if you can't even admit that others can see opportunity in the failure of some while you only see a chance to deny and mock.
Who are you to come riding in on your high horse and imply that all Linux users are obligated to help others etc. I don't accept that crap from anyone. Not Linus, not Mark Shuttleworth and certainly not you.
Who are you to claim all FOSS users and developers think in a certain way. Do you even have any degrees in psychology?
I don't care if you are another FOSS developers, if you're a FOSS user, if you're richer than Bill Gates. You have no right to imply people are obligated to help, to behave professional everywhere etc. without compensation.
Who are you to think that you have the right to call me names? I have not sworn at you. I have been very civilized in my language. This also isn't a good way to convince me you are just merely offering advice, but rather in my opinion, just reciting old arguments to attack the Linux users/community/platform.
I only asked that some open their eyes to the constant disrespect of people not as experienced as you
It's disrespect to go into a mechanics clubs, claim a bunch of crap you certainly don't know about as fact and not expect to be corrected.
From your posts, I feel that you make too many assumptions, generalize too much and work off stereotypes.
But don't think you look like a decent person or a good example of what other Linux developers want to be.
Boohoo, I won't support you in a non-support forum. You didn't ask for help either, neither did the original poster. They claimed something as fact, I pointed out he is lying, either intentionally or unintentionally.
I never picked you out in my post as the one who had to help others, I just thought that the whole idealist mindset of the Linux community was that people contributed to the improvement of the whole, made things better for themselves and others and released it back to the community.
Stop generalizing.
The next time you post that Gimp is comparable to Photoshop, remember that you have no obligation to help others for free and the people that wrote the code that makes those types of programs better/comparable think otherwise.
No, I don't have any obligation to help another for free. I don't have any obligation to continue my opensource projects, nor do I have any obligation to help others -- I still do.
But no, I will not help people who don't ask for it in a non-support location.
means that you are a leech. Just another User.
What? I don't have a obligation to. I still do it anyway. You must be twisted in the head if you think that us developers, users and so on are obligated to help people for no compensation. I don't see it, especially in this world.
That said, I still help people daily over IRC, but I know I am not obligated to. I still send in small patches, develop, but I am not obligated to. I send in bug reports, but I am not obligated to. If you want me to be obligated, pay me.
. Just like the person you are dismissing for not being able to get through the installer because they are just a windows user. Not a programmer or computer science guru. Just a user like you.
Did you know developers are users too?
I also don't expect users who chat on my IRC network to help, I don't expect users who use my opensource projects to help either. They certainly don't have any obligation to as I'm not paying them.
Rather than actually address something you make flippant, ignorant comments and put on an air of derisive mocking.
I am tired of people lying about facts.
Not shoot them down when they say they don't understand something.
I don't go into a car festival, bust into a mechanics area and claim that engine X sucks and engine Y rules because I couldn't get working in my car, which has engine Y preinstalled, despite the fact that engine Y is harder to install manually.
Cars are voodoo to me. I don't even know why cars always flash warning lights on start up (No, don't bother answering that). I don't get why it tells me the battery is low and there is no fuel when the car won't start when that isn't the case. People aren't literate in everything, that was my point earlier.
Some people don't know computers that well, and no matter what you do.. There will always be confusion, same goes for me and cars.
But, I don't go around, going to a technical car forum claiming non-sense as fact without even the slightest bit of real research/evidence to back me up in what I say. I'm sure if I did, people would tell me I'm wrong and tell me why. Would they go "Do you need help?" on such blunt statements -- I don't think so.
This is Slashdot, where they have a section called "Ask Slashdot" for opinions and reccomendations.
There was no asking for help, nor is this a "Ask Slashdot" article.
And others are free to try and make it better instead of being selfish leeches and telling him that he is stupid since th
When the BSA takes action against pirates, they are typically seen as the bad guy around these parts.
Usually I hear of people going to give anonymous tips to the BSA on certain companies on Slashdot.
However, the articles we hear about are usually about the BSA forcing schools/universities to buy yet another license for their already OEM licensed hardware, forcing them to use a entirely different licensing system like per seat licensing and so on when they are already licensed. That isn't action against piracy and yes, that makes them a bad guy.
Well, this *is* just speculation, but my evidence is that other changes appear to have been made to Dosbox. It doesn't run in it's standard configuration, with (for example) a central repository for shared data. Rather, there is one Dosbox per Steam game. That suggests a source code change to me. The Dosbox people also seem to think it has been modified here.
But it may not matter, as the evidence strongly suggests that the Dosbox code has been recompiled with some Steam API calls.
Has it? Where is this evidence that it isn't just a binary produced from a exe wrapper utility to integrate it into Steam etc?
Why would Valve make a binary modifier to install Steam code in a game, when they can just recompile it?
I think may Valve have made various options for developers and publishers to use to integrate games into Steam. I was theorizing on the concept if it was a exe compressor/protector and so on then there isn't any new sourcecode to publish.
It would be nice to hear from a Steam developer, either Valve or 3rd party, but I imagine this stuff is under NDA.
Steam applications all include some copy protection code that involves communicating with the main Steam.exe program: this is most visible in games that weren't designed for Steam, such as Defcon or one of the Popcap games. Like them, Dosbox must have been modified to include this copy protection code.
What if the resulting binary is just produced from another binary. Such as those done by exe compressors, anti-reverse engineering protectors etc?
Then why did he not understand if his data was going to be accessable?
Why doesn't my car start sometimes?
I've never seen the installer assure someone that this will be the case and I've never seen an Ubuntu installer with a "just make it work" dual boot option.
I've never seen my car assure me it will start, I get all these warning lights before the engine starts.
The whole point of my post was to get the Linux users off their high horses and actually look at the general public as their user base and make the software comfortable to use.
I have no obligation to help anyone. Just because I am a Linux user (someone who uses Linux) doesn't mean I have to go out of my way to develop applications for free, doesn't mean I have to promote Linux, doesn't mean I have to help others for no compensation.
Hell, I don't even see those expectations on just windows users either.
Perhaps if you did that instead of spending the time exacerbating the frustration of the users by showing them that they know nothing, then you would be able to have an OS that is not only powerful but also easy to use by the people at large.
This is a tech oriented website which is known to be used as a discussion forum on geeky stuff. It is not a help channel, don't expect such help responses to be on such site either.
But instead you decide to pick apart arguments and use the inadequacies of computer users against them.
This is Slashdot, not a help forum.
If it were a help forum -- sure, I wouldn't be arguing facts.
Yes, but you're not trying to advocate that users with Linux pre-installed should switch to Linux,
I'm not advocating anything actually. I'm pointing out it's easier to get Linux to interoperate with Windows than the other way around.
so while you're right about the Windows partitioning software being awful it's a moot point because most people have machines that come with Windows pre-installed and don't deal with it.
I am just pointing out that Linux is easier from what I can see. People claiming that Windows is easier for partitioning and so on have a invalid claim in this case.
If the Linux software isn't up to scratch its easier not to try something that can hose their operating system and leave them having to try to work out how both installers work before their computer will run at all.
There is a chance any OS install will hose a system.
For any major operation: backup, backup, oh and backup.
But the reason I don't use Ubuntu is because there was no option to just put the CD in the drive, click 'OK' to the the "Do you want to set up a Dual Boot System?" and come back after making coffee to find everything done except maybe setting the time and the date. In my experience, installing Windows hasn't ever been much more complicated than that.
Err... For Ubuntu and Kubuntu, Just open the install icon on the desktop, click next all the way except where it asks you to enter your user credentials, machine name and timezone information and done.
The default options selected in the installer are to resize the windows partition, install it. The boot loader updater program is set to automatically probe all partitions for other OS installations and set it up in the bootloader, so dual boot is ready out of the box.
Ubuntu will even give you a migration manager to migrate your settings from Windows such as bookmarks, documents etc.
For all the linux fanboys out there, It's worth remembering that Linux doesn't just have to be user friendly to use in order to capture market share from M$, it has to be a one-click, no-brains migration process as well.
I honestly don't believe you tried Ubuntu from your descriptions.
So long as you don't have that, the evidence in the real world speaks for itself about Linux's failed strategy.
That's great and all, except the issues you complained about, don't exist.
Why does someone who wants to use an OS for daily office tasks have to know more about partitions when using your operating system than they already know about your competitors.
Yes, why does Windows require me to know more exactly about partitions than Ubuntu/Kubuntu does? I can just click the resize partitions option (selected by default when it sees Windows partitions, so you can just push 'next' anyway) and install the OS needed, it'll even setup dual boot...
But then, try installing Windows for daily office tasks on a Ubuntu/Kubuntu system, where is the resize option? What is a unknown partition type?
If you figure this out and resize the partition in Linux so you can install windows along side with your Ubuntu/Kubuntu install, where did Linux go after installing it? Where is the dual boot menu? Where is the Windows application, registry entry, configuration file for setting up the Linux dual boot under Windows even?
You fail to see that he has been using windows and didn't need to understand more about partitioning to get the tasks he uses his computer for done.
I didn't see a need to understand partitioning with the Ubuntu/Kubuntu installer, I did for the Windows installer.
He is told: "You are the problem, not Linux."
No, he has been told that Windows is more difficult to setup with preinstalled Linux system than Windows being preinstalled and Linux being setup after.
Come on. You don't think that you can make a perl script that chooses from a few parameters like drive size and used partition space and makes a reasonable judgement call. Put a "just make it work" button on the installer and tell noobs to click it if they want a dual boot with their old stuff accessable to both operating systems. I thought Linux was better.
Here is the thing, Ubuntu/Kubuntu already do this, it's been in the installer for ages.
Actually, most new machines I see have a recovery partition. That's what I didn't want to mess around with. And no, there was no automatic partitioning option. I assure you, the following did NOT take place:
"Ubuntu has detected Windows XP installed on this system. If you would like to create a Dual Boot setup, click 'Create Dual Boot System' and Ubuntu will automatically partition your drives for you." Click. Done.
Nope, you should of got three options (under Ubuntu and Kubuntu) like:
Use entire disk space
Resize windows partition and install
Custom
The second one would of been checked by default in such a situation.
You are correct however, there is no question about setting up dual boot, but it doesn't matter since when Ubuntu/Kubuntu installs the bootloader, the update-grub program scans the partitions for Windows installations and sets them up automatically in Grub.
I don't know the numbers, nor do I know the numbers under Windows and Linux. But I believe it is safe to say that there is at least 100 applications available on OS X that can make use of it.
"Only two remote holes in the default install, in more than 10 years!"
That's as close as you get to 100%, if you could ever say anything is truly 100%
]:P~
After evaluating OpenBSD, I find the defaults quite appalling. It is difficult for many users to install due to the partitioner being a CLI which isn't very helpful, the default setup of X is quite unbelievably horrid. It's not even setup to auto detect your hardware.
Setting it up to boot into a graphical system with a login menu is far more difficult than it should be compared to Linux distributions.
The security defaults aren't amusing either. There is no sudo setup by default. It doesn't encourage the user to use tools like sudo, instead when you install the system, you create a root password rather than creating a normal user account and it's password with sudo access while disabling login access to root. There is no graphical configuration tools, and if they were, it would be unlikely they would be configured to launch from the menu with kdesu (if KDE) or gksudo (If Gnome, XFCE etc).
That said, the kernel scheduler impresses me and while it is difficult to operate, being able to run things like Linux applications on a non-Linux system is definitely a plus (don't expect to run things like vmware which require the use of a kernel module).
At this time, I don't really see OpenBSD as a viable alternative to Windows, OS X or Linux desktops for security purposes or ease of use (this is important if you want the user to find being secure is easier than insecure) -- I believe many users would likely do stupid things like running their desktops as root.
. I can use the same.Xdefaults file I've been using for 15 years
THE HORROR, you might need to configure something!?
3. Screen real estate not wasted by using menu bars
You can hide the menubars.
4. xterm is descriptive: it's an X Terminal; konsole is just a wierd mispelling of 'console.' And technically it's not even a console, because you can have multiple ones running and they don't all get console output from syslog.
You really don't have any reasonable points at all... Give it up.
Yes, because disabling support for the standard Internet Gateway Device support which software uses to seamlessly setup port forwarding on NAT systems etc. and having the user do it manually is good.
Many, many programs use IGD, from Instant Messengers to games.
The Intel and PPC binaries are peas in the same pod.
Technically universal binaries are a x86 and a PPC binary embedded into one file. While they maybe compiled from the same source, that doesn't mean they will have behavior differences due to flaws in the code.
In this case, Microsoft has given users a very responsive desktop full of whiz bang graphics
Luna themes vs themes one can use on KDE/Gnome, responsiveness when there is a few I/O operations like copy operations... Aero effects and requirements vs Beryl effects and requirements.
Hell, what about the crap they did with MFC to make it difficult for people to make multi-threaded GUI applications so they're always responsive?
Who are you trying to kid?
a (mostly) unified way of installing, configuring, using, and uninstalling applications which very rarely requires anything more than clicking "next, next, next, done".
If only there was such a thing under Kubuntu, Redhat, CentOS, Mandriva, SuSE... Oh wait!
Linux has a long way to go before it can be taken seriously on the desktop as a general use OS and you're just fooling yourself and drinking too much of your own koolaid if you think otherwise.
I think it works very well as a general use OS actually.
I think it fails where it needs to use specialist Windows only programs that don't run under Wine out of the box. It also fails where Windows is the only option available in shops, I'm sure if Linux were the only option in shops, it would gain such great momentum too.
Linux has a long way to go before
Well according to your reasoning, there isn't a problem.
Slashdot Mirror
I might have gone down a slightly different route, but certainly not screwed my entire argument.
I do find it interesting how soon after you do this post, I see that I've been modded down in another article suddenly. Somehow I don't think that was a coincidence.
If someone complains that something sucks in a help channnel on IRC -- I'm more likely to actually see if they need help with it than debate the fact. So yes, this is very relevant.
Pink.
Richard Stallman thinks one of the purposes of FOSS software is not run into issues people cannot fix, like Richard Stallman and his printer many years ago.
Yeah, it is pretty much.
There are many reasons than just this for FOSS software, and this reason probably doesn't apply to everyone.
There are those who believe software should be free in general, hence FOSS. Others who believe FOSS is good for a security point of view (many eyes). There are those who believe other things too. And, if you want to know my stance... There are people like me, who in particular just like FOSS because we see it as superior, but don't care really too much for any philosophy it's connected too, the only reason why it's (in the group which believe this) used is because it's viewed as technically superior.
And you have completely ignored my argument from earlier. I do not go into a car mechanics area, trying to show that I know all about cars (when I don't) then giving bad facts and bad opinions to said group. I certainly wouldn't expect the mechanics to just offer me help on the issue as much as debate me on the facts.
Who are you to come riding in on your high horse and imply that all Linux users are obligated to help others etc. I don't accept that crap from anyone. Not Linus, not Mark Shuttleworth and certainly not you.
Who are you to claim all FOSS users and developers think in a certain way. Do you even have any degrees in psychology?
I don't care if you are another FOSS developers, if you're a FOSS user, if you're richer than Bill Gates. You have no right to imply people are obligated to help, to behave professional everywhere etc. without compensation.
Who are you to think that you have the right to call me names? I have not sworn at you. I have been very civilized in my language. This also isn't a good way to convince me you are just merely offering advice, but rather in my opinion, just reciting old arguments to attack the Linux users/community/platform.
It's disrespect to go into a mechanics clubs, claim a bunch of crap you certainly don't know about as fact and not expect to be corrected.
From your posts, I feel that you make too many assumptions, generalize too much and work off stereotypes.
Boohoo, I won't support you in a non-support forum. You didn't ask for help either, neither did the original poster. They claimed something as fact, I pointed out he is lying, either intentionally or unintentionally.
Stop generalizing.
No, I don't have any obligation to help another for free. I don't have any obligation to continue my opensource projects, nor do I have any obligation to help others -- I still do.
But no, I will not help people who don't ask for it in a non-support location.
What? I don't have a obligation to. I still do it anyway. You must be twisted in the head if you think that us developers, users and so on are obligated to help people for no compensation. I don't see it, especially in this world.
That said, I still help people daily over IRC, but I know I am not obligated to. I still send in small patches, develop, but I am not obligated to. I send in bug reports, but I am not obligated to. If you want me to be obligated, pay me.
Did you know developers are users too?
I also don't expect users who chat on my IRC network to help, I don't expect users who use my opensource projects to help either. They certainly don't have any obligation to as I'm not paying them.
I am tired of people lying about facts.
I don't go into a car festival, bust into a mechanics area and claim that engine X sucks and engine Y rules because I couldn't get working in my car, which has engine Y preinstalled, despite the fact that engine Y is harder to install manually.
Cars are voodoo to me. I don't even know why cars always flash warning lights on start up (No, don't bother answering that). I don't get why it tells me the battery is low and there is no fuel when the car won't start when that isn't the case. People aren't literate in everything, that was my point earlier.
Some people don't know computers that well, and no matter what you do.. There will always be confusion, same goes for me and cars.
But, I don't go around, going to a technical car forum claiming non-sense as fact without even the slightest bit of real research/evidence to back me up in what I say. I'm sure if I did, people would tell me I'm wrong and tell me why. Would they go "Do you need help?" on such blunt statements -- I don't think so.
There was no asking for help, nor is this a "Ask Slashdot" article.
However, the articles we hear about are usually about the BSA forcing schools/universities to buy yet another license for their already OEM licensed hardware, forcing them to use a entirely different licensing system like per seat licensing and so on when they are already licensed. That isn't action against piracy and yes, that makes them a bad guy.
Hell, I don't even see those expectations on just windows users either.This is a tech oriented website which is known to be used as a discussion forum on geeky stuff. It is not a help channel, don't expect such help responses to be on such site either.This is Slashdot, not a help forum.
If it were a help forum -- sure, I wouldn't be arguing facts.
For any major operation: backup, backup, oh and backup.
The default options selected in the installer are to resize the windows partition, install it. The boot loader updater program is set to automatically probe all partitions for other OS installations and set it up in the bootloader, so dual boot is ready out of the box.
Ubuntu will even give you a migration manager to migrate your settings from Windows such as bookmarks, documents etc.I honestly don't believe you tried Ubuntu from your descriptions.That's great and all, except the issues you complained about, don't exist.
But then, try installing Windows for daily office tasks on a Ubuntu/Kubuntu system, where is the resize option? What is a unknown partition type?
If you figure this out and resize the partition in Linux so you can install windows along side with your Ubuntu/Kubuntu install, where did Linux go after installing it?
Where is the dual boot menu?
Where is the Windows application, registry entry, configuration file for setting up the Linux dual boot under Windows even?I didn't see a need to understand partitioning with the Ubuntu/Kubuntu installer, I did for the Windows installer.No, he has been told that Windows is more difficult to setup with preinstalled Linux system than Windows being preinstalled and Linux being setup after.Here is the thing, Ubuntu/Kubuntu already do this, it's been in the installer for ages.
The second one would of been checked by default in such a situation.
You are correct however, there is no question about setting up dual boot, but it doesn't matter since when Ubuntu/Kubuntu installs the bootloader, the update-grub program scans the partitions for Windows installations and sets them up automatically in Grub.
I don't see the issue in your complaint.
Setting it up to boot into a graphical system with a login menu is far more difficult than it should be compared to Linux distributions.
The security defaults aren't amusing either. There is no sudo setup by default. It doesn't encourage the user to use tools like sudo, instead when you install the system, you create a root password rather than creating a normal user account and it's password with sudo access while disabling login access to root. There is no graphical configuration tools, and if they were, it would be unlikely they would be configured to launch from the menu with kdesu (if KDE) or gksudo (If Gnome, XFCE etc).
That said, the kernel scheduler impresses me and while it is difficult to operate, being able to run things like Linux applications on a non-Linux system is definitely a plus (don't expect to run things like vmware which require the use of a kernel module).
At this time, I don't really see OpenBSD as a viable alternative to Windows, OS X or Linux desktops for security purposes or ease of use (this is important if you want the user to find being secure is easier than insecure) -- I believe many users would likely do stupid things like running their desktops as root.
Many, many programs use IGD, from Instant Messengers to games.
Sorry, I cannot agree that it is the right thing.
I have a theory the reason for this is that xterm is a lot slower at rendering the text on screen than Konsole is.
Combine the fact that Konsole supports tabs, I don't really find myself wanting to use xterm in my desktop environment.
Wasn't these issues already dealt with?
Hell, what about the crap they did with MFC to make it difficult for people to make multi-threaded GUI applications so they're always responsive?
Who are you trying to kid?If only there was such a thing under Kubuntu, Redhat, CentOS, Mandriva, SuSE... Oh wait!I think it works very well as a general use OS actually.
I think it fails where it needs to use specialist Windows only programs that don't run under Wine out of the box. It also fails where Windows is the only option available in shops, I'm sure if Linux were the only option in shops, it would gain such great momentum too.Well according to your reasoning, there isn't a problem.