first off, let me address the pissing contest. that was more or less a joke to bring out how much you know about linux w/o just asking you. sounds like you have at least been using it longer than i have
You're making the arbitrary decision that bundling a browser is OK at the GUI level, but not at the OS level. I don't see why one is fine and the other is not.
no, im not. my point is that even if they do bundle it, i have another choice. you originally said something about there not being a difference between not installing gnome and not installing windows. i simply pointed out that the difference was that if i dont install gnome, i can still have an OS. if you dont install windows, you dont have an OS. it had no relation to some "arbitrary" decision about bundling with OS or gui.
People make a lot of fuss over the whole "I don't want IE on my computer!" as if having it there rots your disk or something
not exactly. i have to keep IE around to make sure we develop we pages that work with it. i keep several browsers around for that reason. however, i would like to have the choice for something else for a window manager. my problem isnt so much the fact that IE is there, but the fact that it is a permanent part of the OS. as in, it cant be removed because the OS depends on it. if i dont like how it works, i can't get another program to do that job (regardless of what browser i use). i mean this to say that its function as an un-removable part of the OS is what bothers me, not the fact that it is the default browser. sure, i can always use another browser, but i have no choice for wm. honestly, as far as i know, it does a fair enough job, but thats not the point for me.
im not intending to spread FUD, im simply making the point that microsoft forces you into a lot of things that some people dont want. for instance, i have changed my default browser to opera but windows update refuses to acknowledge that. not everything MS does is of the devil, i rather like the.NET ide and xp seems to be a pretty nice OS, i use both a fair amount at home. i just dont like the idea that IE has to be there as part of the OS, not just because its simply bundled with it. bundled and integral are two different things.
From a philosophical point of view, I fail to see why "you don't have to install gnome" is any different than "you don't have to install windows."
its different because you can install linux with (any choice of) or without a gui. for instance, if you have a server setup, you dont need X, gnone, a keyboard, mouse, monitor, or possibly even a graphics card. i can run linux without a gui. can you run (modern)windows without one?
Besides which, it's just as easy to use a different browser with Windows as it is with Gnome or other common desktop environments.
what? are you suggesting that i can remove IE from windows? i was not aware of that possiblity. in fact, it was my understanding that it is so heavily embedded in the os that they were running into legal monopoly issues. with linux, i can run any window manager i want with any browser i want. okay, i might run into dependecy issues with a few, but thats trivial to my point. not using IE and not installing it are two different things. the key point is that IE is part of the OS. at least mozilla will be part of a (singe, removable) display manager. if i dont like how they take things, i can simply use kde or something else(or nothing at all) and still run the linux kernel for stability.
i dont mean to be a prick or to infer that im an expert, but methinks you dont know linux very well. not a problem at all, you can learn:-)
ah yes. reminds me of the days when an upgrade to a 386 would render your 286 games unplayable due to the increased speed. the blessed turbo button, however, could be turned off in just such a situation.
is this actually a concern with the GBA and the SNES? are they still timing things off of that clock?
im not going to fault you for asking that question, first of all. on the surface, they seem similar. however, i dont have to install gnome at all. nor do i have to install X, for that matter. the point is that you cant have windows without IE. i can still have gnu/linux in a nearly-infinite number of other combinations with or without gnome if i dont like mozilla being integrated. not only that, but IMO, mozilla is much better software than IE.
it may be slower, ill admit that. if they let me use a client like m2 that lets me leave the mail on the server, then that and my broadband going down arent issues. i couldnt care any less(okay, maybe a little) about email security, personally. so long as they arent sending me spam from reading my emails, im ok.
the 1bg is not a distraction for me, its something i want. i woudl really like to have 1gb of storage available to me online anytime i want from anywhere i want. i would like to be able to keep a lot more messages than i do now with my hotmail account. if you dont want that much storage, dont get it, thats fine. im simply stating that there are those of us out there that would really like this for various reasons.
i know you didnt say you didnt use web email. in fact, i noticed that you specifically said you did use web email. my point was that i bet your web email wont give you access to 1GB of files, emails, etc anywhere in the world. you cant do that with a client unless you can install things. this is a web interface (with pop, etc to follow, i hope) with access to the 1GB. i also dont know of an email service that could let you search thru all your old emails (tho that doesnt mean one doesnt exist). if this were only, say 10MB, sure. thats nothing special, but 1GB is. thats a hell of a lot of email.
attachement size is limited to like 30MB. unless you want to split it up into those sizes, it woudnt work. i suppose you could write something that could automatically do that and then have something to recreate it on the other end. it would be easier to do mp3s with this. that way, a 2 hour show could be split up into only like 4 pieces.
what about if you travel or have two(or more) machines you need to check email on? can you get your email then? one thing i like about this is that i wont need to get a usb drive. hell, a gig is more than i get on my slice of the CS dept server. anywhere i go, i get access to my gig of email with programs ive written and sent to myself, etc.
plus, if i get to use my m2 (opera's email dingy) then i can have my emails stored on my machine during access blackouts. since it leaves it on the server, any new machine i set up can have all those emails again without importing them from another machine.
to each his own. i dont like hype, but this seems like something i would really like. shoot, ill put up with "relevant" text ads so long as they dont blink at me, hehe.
i agree. we dont have to worry nearly as much about smaller nations that want them. they usually just want to blow the hell out of each other over land, water, religious reasons, etc. terrorists, on the other hand, often have every intention of being suicidal about it. as a US citizen, i have trouble balancing the desire for being safe from such attacks with the paranoia that results from what even actions i deem necessary to ensure this.
on another note, is that sig from a "dead milkmen" song?
well, i had a fan on mine, but only because it was actually a 180 running at 233. for the most part, i think fans started really happening on cpus around the 166 or so. i could be wrong, and im sure it varied by manufacturer. 75's didnt have them and 180's usually did.
just a note: i dont think the default dell-ers have any idea that their ram is low. they just know that the machine may run slowly. they usually dont have any idea why. if you figure a 128MB machine with even just 32MB of shared video, thats only 96MB left for XP. not a good idea.
agreed. having your woman with you is even worse(better, whichever). i think its the fact that one of their own has put the stamp of approval on you so they dont have to check you out. its like a inspection/validation system. my wife has noticed this and gets a little closer any time any woman remotely hot walks by, hehe. i dont mind, she knows she doesnt have anything to worry about.
that evil bit has been around a really long time. slashdot has been covering it for years. i dont think OpenBSD finally getting around to using it is anything outstanding. they could have had it done a long time ago. nothing to see here, move along.
does that mean that there was no offending code to take out of 2.4 and 2.6 before this review? its entirely possible that im full of it, but i thought there were a few things in there that were quickly removed. if so, they might not have been removed from the older kernels. am i just wrong?
regardless of grandparents modding and risking a redundant myself, im not sure i need linux to be marketed properly. it suits my needs as an OS right now. the "technical chops" are what i like about it. i dont necessarily need my mom to want to use it too. so long as it does what i need, it is what i want. i mean sure, we all want linux to thrive, but it becoming mainstream is not exactly what I need it to do. its like what others have said above, i dont need cisco to dumb things down for me. i dont need linux to get better for joe-user. i just need linux to be a solid OS good for development and servers. if people want it to dominate the desktop, thats fine with me so long as it still does what i need it to.
but that doesnt matter. the car has already been made. his point is that if he drives his classic, he wont need another car to be made for him.
will you buy the statement that its more environmentally expensive to make and drive a (near)zero-emissions car than to not make said car and drive another that was already made 40 years ago(thus eliminating the ability to prevent its manufacturing)? if i drive older cars with new fuel injected engines, i eliminate the need for new cars to be made for me. i think thats better.
whether the original statement that its cleaner to drive an old car than to make a new one is debateable. my point is that the cost of making the old car is irrelevant because it cant be eliminated while the cost of making a new one can.
oh BS, just try to make a lawsuit stick on Boyd or Jesse James, whoever. if i run a shop, i make no claim as to having improved the cars safety. you honestly think that is a concern?
Slashdot Mirror
im not intending to spread FUD, im simply making the point that microsoft forces you into a lot of things that some people dont want. for instance, i have changed my default browser to opera but windows update refuses to acknowledge that. not everything MS does is of the devil, i rather like the
i dont mean to be a prick or to infer that im an expert, but methinks you dont know linux very well. not a problem at all, you can learn
ah yes. reminds me of the days when an upgrade to a 386 would render your 286 games unplayable due to the increased speed. the blessed turbo button, however, could be turned off in just such a situation.
is this actually a concern with the GBA and the SNES? are they still timing things off of that clock?
im not going to fault you for asking that question, first of all. on the surface, they seem similar. however, i dont have to install gnome at all. nor do i have to install X, for that matter. the point is that you cant have windows without IE. i can still have gnu/linux in a nearly-infinite number of other combinations with or without gnome if i dont like mozilla being integrated. not only that, but IMO, mozilla is much better software than IE.
it may be slower, ill admit that. if they let me use a client like m2 that lets me leave the mail on the server, then that and my broadband going down arent issues. i couldnt care any less(okay, maybe a little) about email security, personally. so long as they arent sending me spam from reading my emails, im ok.
the 1bg is not a distraction for me, its something i want. i woudl really like to have 1gb of storage available to me online anytime i want from anywhere i want. i would like to be able to keep a lot more messages than i do now with my hotmail account. if you dont want that much storage, dont get it, thats fine. im simply stating that there are those of us out there that would really like this for various reasons.
i know you didnt say you didnt use web email. in fact, i noticed that you specifically said you did use web email. my point was that i bet your web email wont give you access to 1GB of files, emails, etc anywhere in the world. you cant do that with a client unless you can install things. this is a web interface (with pop, etc to follow, i hope) with access to the 1GB. i also dont know of an email service that could let you search thru all your old emails (tho that doesnt mean one doesnt exist). if this were only, say 10MB, sure. thats nothing special, but 1GB is. thats a hell of a lot of email.
attachement size is limited to like 30MB. unless you want to split it up into those sizes, it woudnt work. i suppose you could write something that could automatically do that and then have something to recreate it on the other end. it would be easier to do mp3s with this. that way, a 2 hour show could be split up into only like 4 pieces.
what about if you travel or have two(or more) machines you need to check email on? can you get your email then? one thing i like about this is that i wont need to get a usb drive. hell, a gig is more than i get on my slice of the CS dept server. anywhere i go, i get access to my gig of email with programs ive written and sent to myself, etc.
plus, if i get to use my m2 (opera's email dingy) then i can have my emails stored on my machine during access blackouts. since it leaves it on the server, any new machine i set up can have all those emails again without importing them from another machine.
to each his own. i dont like hype, but this seems like something i would really like. shoot, ill put up with "relevant" text ads so long as they dont blink at me, hehe.
i agree. we dont have to worry nearly as much about smaller nations that want them. they usually just want to blow the hell out of each other over land, water, religious reasons, etc. terrorists, on the other hand, often have every intention of being suicidal about it. as a US citizen, i have trouble balancing the desire for being safe from such attacks with the paranoia that results from what even actions i deem necessary to ensure this.
on another note, is that sig from a "dead milkmen" song?
well, i had a fan on mine, but only because it was actually a 180 running at 233. for the most part, i think fans started really happening on cpus around the 166 or so. i could be wrong, and im sure it varied by manufacturer. 75's didnt have them and 180's usually did.
i find it hard to believe that slashdot has caused any births...
just a note: i dont think the default dell-ers have any idea that their ram is low. they just know that the machine may run slowly. they usually dont have any idea why. if you figure a 128MB machine with even just 32MB of shared video, thats only 96MB left for XP. not a good idea.
holy crap, after seeing those picture, me too!
agreed. having your woman with you is even worse(better, whichever). i think its the fact that one of their own has put the stamp of approval on you so they dont have to check you out. its like a inspection/validation system. my wife has noticed this and gets a little closer any time any woman remotely hot walks by, hehe. i dont mind, she knows she doesnt have anything to worry about.
ive got a senior level networks class in 10 minutes and i have no idea!
seriously tho, my best guess(for whatever thats worth) is that you are correct
that evil bit has been around a really long time. slashdot has been covering it for years. i dont think OpenBSD finally getting around to using it is anything outstanding. they could have had it done a long time ago. nothing to see here, move along.
its a program called diff. hehe, j/k
if there is any sort of cpu and computing architecture on there, probably.
does that mean that there was no offending code to take out of 2.4 and 2.6 before this review? its entirely possible that im full of it, but i thought there were a few things in there that were quickly removed. if so, they might not have been removed from the older kernels. am i just wrong?
regardless of grandparents modding and risking a redundant myself, im not sure i need linux to be marketed properly. it suits my needs as an OS right now. the "technical chops" are what i like about it. i dont necessarily need my mom to want to use it too. so long as it does what i need, it is what i want. i mean sure, we all want linux to thrive, but it becoming mainstream is not exactly what I need it to do. its like what others have said above, i dont need cisco to dumb things down for me. i dont need linux to get better for joe-user. i just need linux to be a solid OS good for development and servers. if people want it to dominate the desktop, thats fine with me so long as it still does what i need it to.
thats really interesting. any idea why?
interesting... would this be a problem with engines designed for running on alcohol?
but that doesnt matter. the car has already been made. his point is that if he drives his classic, he wont need another car to be made for him.
will you buy the statement that its more environmentally expensive to make and drive a (near)zero-emissions car than to not make said car and drive another that was already made 40 years ago(thus eliminating the ability to prevent its manufacturing)? if i drive older cars with new fuel injected engines, i eliminate the need for new cars to be made for me. i think thats better.
whether the original statement that its cleaner to drive an old car than to make a new one is debateable. my point is that the cost of making the old car is irrelevant because it cant be eliminated while the cost of making a new one can.
oh BS, just try to make a lawsuit stick on Boyd or Jesse James, whoever. if i run a shop, i make no claim as to having improved the cars safety. you honestly think that is a concern?