i think i am cheering because real listened to them and fixed it. not to say that real is a good/bad/indifferent company, just the fact that they actually listened to cartalk and fixed some stuff is cool. i didnt know there were alternatives until this thread, but i dont do a lot of realaudio or quicktime stuff.
i understand keeping the two linux systems i run up to date, i can install packages(normally) like opera and gaim on my slack system and the debian system i use at work is obviously simple to maintain with apt-get(tho finding a site to apt-get opera with is not easy). i dont particularly like compiling from source. this is only due to my lack of experience with this sort of thing, tho. it just seems a bit daunting. it is, without doubt, a solution for my question, but it always seems a bit more difficult to do it that way than just double-click on the *.exe. imo, windows has at least made installation easy, if not too easy(read: insecure) at times. am i just too much of a noob and installing from source is way easier than i think?
However, Mozilla, OpenOffice, and nVidia driver installers seem to work well on several different distros and kernels without having to download different versions.
aha, this is an excellent point. why are these apps different from my example of opera? is it actually possible, on the package side, to develop apps that are easier to install on different flavors of linux? if not, i just dont understand why something like an installer couldnt be standard. i know that different distros exist for different reasons, but why would it be so difficult to get some sort of standardized installer. i further realize that the kernel is linux, not the distro. however, i'm not the only one that thinks this about linux installers(for all distros), just look at that other/. story about the zero installation... umm... link... here. also, doesnt osX do this already?
i am desparately trying to switch to linux for my development at least (ive pretty much given up on gaming on linux for now) but installing packages is way harder than it needs to be. i even get tons of microsoft software free (xp, 2k,.net03, etc) because my univ has signed a deal with the devil for lotsa licenses. i dont like the way microsoft does business and i want to change. im just not sure that millions of flavors doing things like installing packages millions of different ways is a good thing.
genuine questions, i want to know. id rather have responses that mod points, please
no doubt. look at the downloads page for opera on linux. look at how many different packaging types they have to produce to make it easy to get on your linux machine. thats 12 download options for the "same" OS (note quotation marks mods/flamers, i realize they are not all the same). seems like there coudl be something, or someway to standardize...
this alone makes parent's post worth at least a few giggles. i realize you are serious and that hamster piss sux, is corrosive, and smells, but nice work in the humor dept.
"no" to all of that, as i would assume you already know. however, i dont need any of that. like some other poster said, i keep pages i want to view reasonably soon in a tab and ones i really want to make sure i can find again in the bookmarks. if i need to find something, i can search the history. i dont need thumbnails. i suppose if you had dialup, that would really make a difference, tho. nothing wrong with this mac software in the article, i just dont have a need for it at all.
that is interesting. every copy of xp ive installed has taken some real abuse and kept on ticking. while i dont care for microsoft in general, xp seems to do most everything people i know need it to do. there are a few of us that run some linux stuff on the side for personal web/ftp servers, etc, but xp seems to be pretty solid. I cant imagine what could be causing such problems with your install, unless its a matter of ugrading like another reply suggests.
The Gnome and KDE provided were extremely weird and nonstandard
what is this standard you speak of? i wasnt aware that either of them even pretended to comply with any standards like you suggest.
Worse than that, though, was that the add/remove programs utility was badly broken and did not list, for example, rpms that you have installed manually--it only lists whether some of the stuff that comes with Fedora is installed
you realize windows does this too, right? if they dont stick stuff in the registry that lists them in the "add/remove programs" then they dont show up.
There was no mp3 support out of the box
that was on purpose for legal reasons, read above posts about it.
there was no ntfs support out of the box
im not guru, but i am not aware of a distro that does. AFAIK, the problem is that it is a closed standard that hasnt quite been cracked yet. they can read reasonably well with linux ntfs, but i dont think its completely dependable for writing.
that being said, the stuff about it being buggy, crashing, and being slower are all legitimate complaints. i always thought redhat seemed a bit slower than the other distros ive tried. i was very impressed with the speed of slackware, but the updating didnt work as well as id like (if any readers can explain, please do).
i downloaded FC2test2 last night and plan to install it as soon as my senior semester in CS lets up a little. oops... speaking of which, id better go hit some engineering stat.
no disrespect, but to be honest, im not convinced that is true. i still think most people buy them because they are pretty and small. sure, the wheel thing is very cool and functionality is a high point. i just dont think people get an iPod because they played with the alternatives and it worked the best.
i know this is a joke. i laughed. an interesting point in addition to this joke, however, is that currently, the entire first page of results on msn.com for "linux" is very pro-linux. all 14 are tutorials, guides, or stuff like redhat.com. just thought that was interesting.
the initial, on-topic part: i never thought these things would sell to anybody for that price, but i guess it makes sense to me that women would adopt it first. i dont mean that to be sexist, but women tend to care more about aesthetics more, i think. also, i would guess women to care a little more about it being tiny. i mean, id be willing to lug around a bigger, uglier dell player if it was superior in the ways i deemed more important. i just dont see my wife thinking the same way. she would rather have the one that is prettier and smaller. (sure, sure, insert joke about that last sentence *here*)
now for the RvB quote: "didnt i just tell you to stop makin up ficticous animals?"
later... "so, unless anybody has any other names for it, we'll call it the warthog....chipathangy, how bout that? i like it...got a ring to it."
attitude while driving is important, too. if they act like they are just going to get in that space in front of me without signaling whether i like it or not, all 400hp of the ol nova like to close that gap quickly. i leave enough room to feel safe behind someone, not enough for one more car and still have that cushion.
the problem is that your (probably correct) linguistic definitions precisely contradict (perhaps defacto-) standard definitions in computer terms. the statement that graphic is not text is entirely correct in this field as most people would agree. based on exact definitions from a dictionary, this is apparently not correct. however, even tho the computer standard is apparently incorrect, i think it is a justified statement that your parent poster suggested it was a re-inventing of technical meanings in this context. just to be difficult, if a diagram isnt graphic and only text can be, is a graph graphic?
Slashdot Mirror
i think i am cheering because real listened to them and fixed it. not to say that real is a good/bad/indifferent company, just the fact that they actually listened to cartalk and fixed some stuff is cool. i didnt know there were alternatives until this thread, but i dont do a lot of realaudio or quicktime stuff.
excellent point, you answered my question.
i understand keeping the two linux systems i run up to date, i can install packages(normally) like opera and gaim on my slack system and the debian system i use at work is obviously simple to maintain with apt-get(tho finding a site to apt-get opera with is not easy). i dont particularly like compiling from source. this is only due to my lack of experience with this sort of thing, tho. it just seems a bit daunting. it is, without doubt, a solution for my question, but it always seems a bit more difficult to do it that way than just double-click on the *.exe. imo, windows has at least made installation easy, if not too easy(read: insecure) at times. am i just too much of a noob and installing from source is way easier than i think?
i am desparately trying to switch to linux for my development at least (ive pretty much given up on gaming on linux for now) but installing packages is way harder than it needs to be. i even get tons of microsoft software free (xp, 2k,
genuine questions, i want to know. id rather have responses that mod points, please
no doubt. look at the downloads page for opera on linux. look at how many different packaging types they have to produce to make it easy to get on your linux machine. thats 12 download options for the "same" OS (note quotation marks mods/flamers, i realize they are not all the same). seems like there coudl be something, or someway to standardize...
clearly a flaw in your school, which makes my university superior.
theyre right next to the bucket of fstops, yo
no. with the cable stretcher, you dont need cordless because you can always make one longer.
any (film) grips in the house fall for that or the "sky hook"?
haha, your post is way funnier than the stories could ever be. still gullible at this late in the day? :-)
think of the system youd have to use to get that many characters out of so few buttons... man, and i thought phone text msging was rough
i thought the george foreman igrill from last year on thinkgeek.com was great. even had it look real up until you try to add it to your cart
right, but i dont see anything about 1GB for free
"I know what the page looks like, just not the title"
huh, i spose so. i dont remember that ever happening to me, but if it does, that would be a useful tool.
"no" to all of that, as i would assume you already know. however, i dont need any of that. like some other poster said, i keep pages i want to view reasonably soon in a tab and ones i really want to make sure i can find again in the bookmarks. if i need to find something, i can search the history. i dont need thumbnails. i suppose if you had dialup, that would really make a difference, tho. nothing wrong with this mac software in the article, i just dont have a need for it at all.
shouldnt that headline be "Your Watching Less TV"?
that is interesting. every copy of xp ive installed has taken some real abuse and kept on ticking. while i dont care for microsoft in general, xp seems to do most everything people i know need it to do. there are a few of us that run some linux stuff on the side for personal web/ftp servers, etc, but xp seems to be pretty solid. I cant imagine what could be causing such problems with your install, unless its a matter of ugrading like another reply suggests.
that being said, the stuff about it being buggy, crashing, and being slower are all legitimate complaints. i always thought redhat seemed a bit slower than the other distros ive tried. i was very impressed with the speed of slackware, but the updating didnt work as well as id like (if any readers can explain, please do).
i downloaded FC2test2 last night and plan to install it as soon as my senior semester in CS lets up a little. oops... speaking of which, id better go hit some engineering stat.
no disrespect, but to be honest, im not convinced that is true. i still think most people buy them because they are pretty and small. sure, the wheel thing is very cool and functionality is a high point. i just dont think people get an iPod because they played with the alternatives and it worked the best.
i know this is a joke. i laughed. an interesting point in addition to this joke, however, is that currently, the entire first page of results on msn.com for "linux" is very pro-linux. all 14 are tutorials, guides, or stuff like redhat.com. just thought that was interesting.
the initial, on-topic part: i never thought these things would sell to anybody for that price, but i guess it makes sense to me that women would adopt it first. i dont mean that to be sexist, but women tend to care more about aesthetics more, i think. also, i would guess women to care a little more about it being tiny. i mean, id be willing to lug around a bigger, uglier dell player if it was superior in the ways i deemed more important. i just dont see my wife thinking the same way. she would rather have the one that is prettier and smaller. (sure, sure, insert joke about that last sentence *here*)
now for the RvB quote:
"didnt i just tell you to stop makin up ficticous animals?"
later...
"so, unless anybody has any other names for it, we'll call it the warthog....chipathangy, how bout that? i like it...got a ring to it."
microsoft doesnt make any product called Mozilla, what are you talking about?
its funny, laugh. or not.
attitude while driving is important, too. if they act like they are just going to get in that space in front of me without signaling whether i like it or not, all 400hp of the ol nova like to close that gap quickly. i leave enough room to feel safe behind someone, not enough for one more car and still have that cushion.
also, see my sig:
the problem is that your (probably correct) linguistic definitions precisely contradict (perhaps defacto-) standard definitions in computer terms. the statement that graphic is not text is entirely correct in this field as most people would agree. based on exact definitions from a dictionary, this is apparently not correct. however, even tho the computer standard is apparently incorrect, i think it is a justified statement that your parent poster suggested it was a re-inventing of technical meanings in this context. just to be difficult, if a diagram isnt graphic and only text can be, is a graph graphic?
.02
just my