Please don't equate "groupthink" with being correct.
the effectiveness of Linux,
This one has some merit, as there are a good number of zealots who won't ever admit any fault with Linux. However, these days there are just as many of the opposite here on/..
the evil of copyright in general
Ehem, bullshit. On/. there is constant discussion about the merit of copyright, both sides often making good points and neither getting modded up/down without merit, except occasionally. I'd call that healthy discussion. I'm in-between - I often argue on both sides and get equal support either way.
and the recording industry in particular
Well, generally, the recording industry has done itself and its customers harm by its actions, so that doesn't leave many people to defend it. There are very few winners in that situation, sans the mega-stars like Britney Spears et al. I think it is reasonable to say that/. is mostly correct about the RIAA.
the lack of merit to SCO's lawsuit
Lol - good one! Perhaps it is because SCO's lawsuit has very little merit, and SCO is behaving in an incredibly odd manner - eg. refusing to say WHAT THE FUCK has been infringed. IBM's legal team would agree entirely with/., coming up with nearly identical arguments against SCO, ditto for Groklaw. Again, it just seems that in this case,/. is mostly correct.
How on earth he got modded to +5 for such a ridiculously false statement is a true testament to the level of knowledge of most/. mods these days.
Anyone over the age of 20 who knows anything about the industry should know that that(ie. consistency) is absolutely not the reason for MS's marketshare, and in fact isn't even true, nor has it ever been true.
Actually, I already knew that, but I fail to see how that is relevent, as the books were indeed published as three separate books.
Besides, there are other examples of great trilogies. For example, the original Star Wars trilogy. The first and third do, however, stand on their own, but the second, while considered by many to be the best of the series, is in its entirety a bridge from the first to the third and does indeed leave much to be desired.
There are plenty of other examples - Asimov's Foundation and Robot series - while some of the books do stand on their own, some don't.
It was an overly broad and generalizing statement the original poster made, IMO. My insulting him was also purely in jest, which some moderator apparently didn't get...
nuff said - but I'll take a couple minutes to insult you anyway, if only to bypass the lameness filter.
Your comment was stupid. Very stupid. One need look no further than the phenomenom known as the LOTR trilogy to see just how stupid your comment was. The LOTR books do not by any means each stand on their own; they may each be enjoying in their own right, but they are incomplete by themselves.
You do know that AOL/TW handled the legalistic matters, no? The Mozilla team came up with the name, and AOL/TW got their lawyers to OK it.
Those "technologies" you listed are mostly irrelevent, and Mozilla has improved by leaps and bounds in many areas. CSS support has improved, speed has improved a great deal, Firebird has become a main focus, Thunderbird is taking off, etc.
Similarly, sure tabs are cool but if you never use them who cares? Personally I do a fair bit of research and I find no use for tabs. I can only read one screen at a time so I don't care for tabs.
What, don't you have ADHD like the rest of us? *grin*
Seriously, I find it to be too much of a PITA to browse without tabs anymore, but to each his own.
How about security, though? You know, there are still huge gaping holes in IE that will allow "untrusted" software to install itself without user interaction. Heh, I witnessed it the other day, as I didn't believe it and had to see for myself.
I think there is plans to still ship a whole suite of apps in one package, except now they'll really be separate apps. The distinction shouldn't get in the way of using it like you always have.
Because, like 99% of Windows "admins," Linux is all they know, probably.
Or possibly:
a. reliability
b. performance
c. customizability
d. price
e. zealotry
f. principle
g. liability
All valid reasons, sans 'e', IMHO.
I think the more interesting question is, "Why do Windows admins waste so much money on Windows licensing when there are other solutions that are often more reliable?"
The answer is, of course, "Because Windows is all they know."
My boss(actually, he's also the CEO of the company) fired a quick email to me asking about the SCO lawsuit, and I simply explained my take on the situation. I pointed to the SCO insider trading, and I mentioned the fact that SCO isn't really SCO, they're Caldera, a failed Linux company.
That was good enough for him.
OTOH, I'm a bit wary of officially experimenting with kernel 2.6 here, simply because of the Sequent code in 2.6. Anyone have any insights into that?
Yes, and action films and porn are just crap too, but people seem to like them. What the fuck is your point? My point is simply, "fuck off, and leave people alone."
Personally, I detest pornography, violent films with no content, etc., but who defines that? I also like the game Manhunt, and many violent films and films involving sex that are not exactly critically acclaimed - because they have something interesting to ME.
From what I can tell, GNOME is diverging from the MS way of doing things. KDE looks more windows-like to me, personally. BTW, gconf doesn't use a binary format anything - all the configuration is simple easy-to-edit-by-hand-if-necessary XML.
GTK 2.x sucks, it just sucks less than GTK 1.x. GIMP 1.3.x's GUI still sucks, it just sucks less than GIMP 1.2.x.
Would you care to substantiate that a little bit more? What exactly makes them suck.
Previously you trashed GIMP because of the interface - yet in newer versions all your arguments against the interface have been addressed. There is a menu for each image window, much saner menu layout - granted, it still sucks that the windows are still independent(ie. bring one to the front doesn't bring them all to the front - however, i just use GIMP on a separate desktop, as *nix nerds are wont to do). MDI is a mis-feature in many peoples' opinion, and if you want MDI, I assume you also think Photoshop on Mac sucks. Just saying it sucks is pretty offensive to those that have done so much work on it. Saying it sucks compared to Photoshop would be true, however. The GIMP is great for people who don't quite need everything Photoshop has.
And I have no idea why anyone says GTK 2.x sucks, especially when comparing it to QT. GTK 2.x has had much better font support than QT 3, and it has been far more stable. QT 3.x had problems with Xft2 and fontconfig for a long while, and in many cases was quite unstable. Also from a user standpoint, GTK 2.x is *much* "cleaner" looking; much more attention is payed to details like positioning text in widgets properly, whereas with QT text is often positioned flush on one border. From a developer standpoint, I like that I can use GTK 2.x, with all its new features, with plain vanilla C. I also like that I can use it for proprietary development without spending over $2k. I have a game project in the works, which I'll probably never make money on(I'm 99% certain of that), so I can't afford to use QT.
Also, I think it'd be a shame if the community did ever standardize on QT, as QT is owned by one single company that holds the key to any proprietary development. Not that I really care too much about proprietary software... just that that could slow adoption of Linux, and/or one company would reap all the benefits of all proprietary development for Linux.
Heh, I'm done blabbing:) I'm interested to hear why you think GTK 2 sucks.
Yeesh, have you ever used anything other than a Windows PC? Only the windows version of Photoshop uses an MDI interface.
I could go on to compare QT fans to Windows users... but that would be silly trolling:P
BTW, the #1 reason people prefer Photoshop over The GIMP is most certainly NOT the GIU. That you think that certainly is telling. The reason people prefer Photoshop is a. 99.9% of people don't know WTF The Gimp is, and b. Photoshop has loads of extremely useful features and plugins that The GIMP lacks.
In fact, I would argue that the latest versions of The GIMP have a much saner interface than Photoshop, but that doesn't nearly make up for the features The GIMP lacks.
Yeesh, you are so off-base it lost its humour and found it again!
28 Days Later is not inspired by RE, not even in the slightest. In fact, 28 Days Later and RE are both in part inspired by a book written in 1954 by Richard Matheson, called I Am Legend.
The writer's conclusions are absolutely ludicrous.
Without the real sports, the games would have very little appeal to most people.
I suggest that the decline in participation has more to do with peoples' lack of time, and the same reason for decline of viewership. A game, OTOH, you can play whenever you have a couple free minutes.
Slashdot Mirror
I know, I know, it was just a joke... And you did great! :)
the effectiveness of Linux,
This one has some merit, as there are a good number of zealots who won't ever admit any fault with Linux. However, these days there are just as many of the opposite here on /..
the evil of copyright in general
Ehem, bullshit. On /. there is constant discussion about the merit of copyright, both sides often making good points and neither getting modded up/down without merit, except occasionally. I'd call that healthy discussion. I'm in-between - I often argue on both sides and get equal support either way.
and the recording industry in particular
Well, generally, the recording industry has done itself and its customers harm by its actions, so that doesn't leave many people to defend it. There are very few winners in that situation, sans the mega-stars like Britney Spears et al. I think it is reasonable to say that /. is mostly correct about the RIAA.
the lack of merit to SCO's lawsuit
Lol - good one! Perhaps it is because SCO's lawsuit has very little merit, and SCO is behaving in an incredibly odd manner - eg. refusing to say WHAT THE FUCK has been infringed. IBM's legal team would agree entirely with /., coming up with nearly identical arguments against SCO, ditto for Groklaw. Again, it just seems that in this case, /. is mostly correct.
Some better examples, please.
How on earth he got modded to +5 for such a ridiculously false statement is a true testament to the level of knowledge of most /. mods these days.
Anyone over the age of 20 who knows anything about the industry should know that that(ie. consistency) is absolutely not the reason for MS's marketshare, and in fact isn't even true, nor has it ever been true.
Besides, there are other examples of great trilogies. For example, the original Star Wars trilogy. The first and third do, however, stand on their own, but the second, while considered by many to be the best of the series, is in its entirety a bridge from the first to the third and does indeed leave much to be desired.
There are plenty of other examples - Asimov's Foundation and Robot series - while some of the books do stand on their own, some don't.
It was an overly broad and generalizing statement the original poster made, IMO. My insulting him was also purely in jest, which some moderator apparently didn't get...
Your comment was stupid. Very stupid. One need look no further than the phenomenom known as the LOTR trilogy to see just how stupid your comment was. The LOTR books do not by any means each stand on their own; they may each be enjoying in their own right, but they are incomplete by themselves.
Ok, I'm done being a dick, heh :P
That is ludicrous! Fuckin' Californian morons...
Those "technologies" you listed are mostly irrelevent, and Mozilla has improved by leaps and bounds in many areas. CSS support has improved, speed has improved a great deal, Firebird has become a main focus, Thunderbird is taking off, etc.
WTF? HIBT?
What, don't you have ADHD like the rest of us? *grin*
Seriously, I find it to be too much of a PITA to browse without tabs anymore, but to each his own.
How about security, though? You know, there are still huge gaping holes in IE that will allow "untrusted" software to install itself without user interaction. Heh, I witnessed it the other day, as I didn't believe it and had to see for myself.
Watch your step... err... mouse. p /.
Really, it will be much better.
What about the code *I* have contributed(not to the kernel itself)? How is _THAT_ not going to be free?
What about my own projects which I have released for free under the GPL?
Mr. Lyons, the code belongs to _US_. Please rid the world of your stupidity, in any way possible, you worthless fucktard.
Because, like 99% of Windows "admins," Linux is all they know, probably.
Or possibly:
a. reliability
b. performance
c. customizability
d. price
e. zealotry
f. principle
g. liability
All valid reasons, sans 'e', IMHO.
I think the more interesting question is, "Why do Windows admins waste so much money on Windows licensing when there are other solutions that are often more reliable?"
The answer is, of course, "Because Windows is all they know."
That was good enough for him.
OTOH, I'm a bit wary of officially experimenting with kernel 2.6 here, simply because of the Sequent code in 2.6. Anyone have any insights into that?
Personally, I detest pornography, violent films with no content, etc., but who defines that? I also like the game Manhunt, and many violent films and films involving sex that are not exactly critically acclaimed - because they have something interesting to ME.
So piss off with your judgements.
Please... That's ridiculous.
People wanted "Mature" games, just like people want "Mature" movies, magazines, books, etc.
If you don't like it, that's fine, but please don't shove your morals down others' throats.
My $0.02 USD
Would you care to substantiate that a little bit more? What exactly makes them suck.
Previously you trashed GIMP because of the interface - yet in newer versions all your arguments against the interface have been addressed. There is a menu for each image window, much saner menu layout - granted, it still sucks that the windows are still independent(ie. bring one to the front doesn't bring them all to the front - however, i just use GIMP on a separate desktop, as *nix nerds are wont to do). MDI is a mis-feature in many peoples' opinion, and if you want MDI, I assume you also think Photoshop on Mac sucks. Just saying it sucks is pretty offensive to those that have done so much work on it. Saying it sucks compared to Photoshop would be true, however. The GIMP is great for people who don't quite need everything Photoshop has.
And I have no idea why anyone says GTK 2.x sucks, especially when comparing it to QT. GTK 2.x has had much better font support than QT 3, and it has been far more stable. QT 3.x had problems with Xft2 and fontconfig for a long while, and in many cases was quite unstable. Also from a user standpoint, GTK 2.x is *much* "cleaner" looking; much more attention is payed to details like positioning text in widgets properly, whereas with QT text is often positioned flush on one border. From a developer standpoint, I like that I can use GTK 2.x, with all its new features, with plain vanilla C. I also like that I can use it for proprietary development without spending over $2k. I have a game project in the works, which I'll probably never make money on(I'm 99% certain of that), so I can't afford to use QT.
Also, I think it'd be a shame if the community did ever standardize on QT, as QT is owned by one single company that holds the key to any proprietary development. Not that I really care too much about proprietary software... just that that could slow adoption of Linux, and/or one company would reap all the benefits of all proprietary development for Linux.
Heh, I'm done blabbing :) I'm interested to hear why you think GTK 2 sucks.
Opinions about GTK < 2.x and Gimp < 1.3.x are pretty much worthless at this point.
Opinions about GTK
Opinions about GTK
I could go on to compare QT fans to Windows users... but that would be silly trolling :P
BTW, the #1 reason people prefer Photoshop over The GIMP is most certainly NOT the GIU. That you think that certainly is telling. The reason people prefer Photoshop is a. 99.9% of people don't know WTF The Gimp is, and b. Photoshop has loads of extremely useful features and plugins that The GIMP lacks.
In fact, I would argue that the latest versions of The GIMP have a much saner interface than Photoshop, but that doesn't nearly make up for the features The GIMP lacks.
28 Days Later is not inspired by RE, not even in the slightest. In fact, 28 Days Later and RE are both in part inspired by a book written in 1954 by Richard Matheson, called I Am Legend.
Read it. It's fantastic.
Without the real sports, the games would have very little appeal to most people.
I suggest that the decline in participation has more to do with peoples' lack of time, and the same reason for decline of viewership. A game, OTOH, you can play whenever you have a couple free minutes.
JMO, YMMV.