My thoughts exactly. But considering that they must have a way to also distinguish Windows users with MS Office from Windows users without, it stands to reason that MS Office must install fonts that aren't normally present in a Windows installation, which is what you would presumably get with msttcorefonts. Surely somebody has read the article and can clear up all this conjecture and confusion?:P
The masses must first have the chance to accept. GP is stating that OEMs have so far humoured Intel and MS to the point that most consumers don't really get the choice. Why is it that (last time I checked), the only laptop sold on dell.ca without Windows installed was pink? Why can I buy an Acer Revo with an Atom 330 and Windows, or the much slower Atom 270 with Linux? The OEMs have yet to offer, at least in Canada, equivalent hardware configs to the non-MS crowd, and I tend to believe the GP that this is exactly the way the gorilla wants it.
can 802.11n devices support 802.11a in the same way that the 2.4GHz 802.11g devices supported 802.11b?
11n devices can operate on 2.4, 5.8 or both. Any 11n device running on 5.8GHz, that I've ever seen, also supports 11a. My Ubiquiti Bullet M5, for example, has a drop-down menu where you select mode. The only option is a/n. I assume the Bullet M2 (2.4GHz model), has a similar drop-down menu with some combination of b/g/n options.
Parenthetically, I recently purchase a Bullet M and outdoor antenna from Ubiquiti, and wanting to avoid the whole 2.4GHz zoo, I bought the 5GHz version. This was serendipitous, I thought, when I recently had my internet suspended (bad Telus). Not fearing, I got up on the roof with my 802.11n laptop to search for signals from charitable neighbours. Enabling just 2.4GHz mode on the laptop I could pick up around 10 APs. Switching to 5GHz-only mode, not a single one! So yeah, 5GHz appears to be really good for avoiding competition, not so good if you were hoping to easedrop:(
You're talking about the present state, a snapshot. I'm talking about a model that is gaining traction. As Coward pointed out, some devices already come with the penguin. Sure, not many yet, but I won't die if it doesn't happen by Friday.
It's not without its drawbacks, but overall it's a win. Tech-types will continue to play with/create distros and forks of distros, while those with more mainstream tastes will stick to the big-name distros like Fedora and Ubuntu that happen to have bigger backing, and therefore tend to be better at distilling all this diversity down to a positive, consistent and familiar user experience.
My assertion holds true for Linux proper. Every major distro (heck, even countless end-users) makes its own customizations to the kernel, and many of these are adopted upstream. What Ubuntu has done for the desktop, for example, Red Hat has done for the kernel. And so forth. Even collaboration between legions of MS kernel developers can't equal this effect, because they're all mandated by the same corporate directors. Linux distros, by contrast each have their own nuanced goals and methods, hence true diversity.
Admittedly, I speak primarily from a consumer's perspective. My expectation, however unlikely for an independent developer such as yourself, is that if an application proves valuable on one platform, some enterprising individual or company will pick that up and port it to another platform. The onus is not on you. Obviously this ideal poses some problems for small entities working on closed projects, but it serves the consumer very well, which is why closed models, such as those currently embraced by MS and the whole **AA cartel are doomed to give way when their proponents finally run out of steam and adapt or fade into the background.
I won't deny anybody's right to make a living at development, but market forces being what they are, the writing is on the wall, and the successful developers of the future will not be solo pilots, but part of a movement. The open development takes away somewhat from the developer-as-entrepreneur ideal, but the tradeoff, for the state of the art as a whole, is a worthy one.
UNR--Ubuntu Netbook Remix. This is straight from the summary, bless your illiterate soul.
XP--Nobody actually knows what this stands for, but you can call it Windows 5.1 if that makes you feel better.
OS--Operating System.
Long live diversity. Arguably, one of MS's greatest weaknesses right now is its lack of diversity (ARM et al). The fact that they have conceded to continue selling xp on netbooks is the major reason they haven't been shut out of the growing netbook segment entirely.
Linux, meanwhile, is in every growing market, and although I may run only 2 or three distros personally, these benefit from the work done in dozens of other distros. The fears of a Linux monoculture are misinformed FUD, as long as Red Hat competes with Ubuntu competes with Suse, and so on.
Microsoft has apparently been aware of this flaw since September.
Further evidence that the only "threat" as far as MS is concerned is the threat of a damaged public perception. Although I suppose that's an improvement in itself.
That was my experience too. Disappointing. Add to that the fact that most of the videos I found (through somewhat random clicking) were flash-only. I didn't find any HD content in html5 at all, and I'm not really sure why. To me, h.264 is hi def. Hours and hours of 720p and 1080p on my NAS, and 99% of it is h.264 encoded, so what is youtube's hold up?
I think speed is everything when you're writing an article for a benchmark site. Note that I'm not disagreeing with your ironic implication that there are other things to look at, but obviously it's a lot easier to churn out some graphs than to try to compare two OSes/suites/whatever on other important metrics, such as security or usability. Leave that to the media troll sites--there's no shortage of them.
Said binary blobs are not part of Linux itself, although they may be part of a Linux distribution. They would be more like Windows than Linux in my original example--closed code that can carry bugs for years without the public ever being aware. It's one reason we 'free software freaks' don't care for binary blobs.
Any code can potentially be compromised. The difference here is that anybody can audit or fix the Linux code, and many people and organisations have and do. So yeah, you're safer using Linux than Windows in that regard.
Recent events seem to suggest that the biggest threats, from MS's point of view, are media exposure and public opinion. The fact that this has now appeared on/. and other media outlets means it will likely be patched in the coming month or so; sooner if people get really loud about it.
Most hardcore religious types typically seek to impose their beliefs on everyone else.
Citation needed. Seriously, if it offends you to learn that somebody put a nearly-invisible bible reference on a rifle sight, I would love to see your reaction when you find out that American currency has "In God we trust" stamped on it.
And now this from the BBC article:
"Everyone is worried that if they were captured in combat that the enemy would use the Bible quotes against them in captivity or some other form of propaganda."
That's just retarded. Now I'm sitting here trying to imagine how the enemy is going to use a scripture reference on my rifle sight against me. Please, help me out here.
but that's for wireless routers, NOT wired which the parent poster was mainly referring to
I don't see how that's a problem. Wireless routers work fine wired. Disable the wireless if you don't want it. Most of the compatible models are not expensive.
Also, inclusion is very limited, per Tomato's homepage
How many do you need? Some of these are more available than others. Some are less expensive than others, but in the end, once you get Tomato on them, they're all more or less equally functional.
As much as I do love m0n0 and PFS, it's not really the same market. These require x86 hardware, while DLink caters to the low-cost OTC MIPS-type stuff, much more appealing to the non-techie home and SOHO user, to whom I enthusiastically recommend Tomato-compatible hardware, such as the always-on-sale ASUS WL520-gu.
But yeah, I've never understood why DLink is as popular as it is. I've seen countless numbers of those things either fail right out of the box, or begin to fail, either outright or in subtle ways, just months after purchase. I'm not sure similar brands like Trendnet or the Best Buy rebate of the week are any better, and the Linksys brand has certainly gone into the sewer in recent years too, but DLink? That crap is everywhere. It's like the Norton of networking hardware.
True to its Linux heritage, you need to manually edit a file to effect a basic settings change:)
Which gets a bit old sometimes, and then you go back and spend a bit of time in a proprietary OS (take your pick), and realize that in many cases there is no file to edit. Until things get better (and things are gradually getting better), I prefer the open way.
I wonder why Google is placing config files in/usr/bin instead of/etc or/opt.
Placing an editable configuration item in/usr/bin is a bit whacky....
Slashdot Mirror
My thoughts exactly. But considering that they must have a way to also distinguish Windows users with MS Office from Windows users without, it stands to reason that MS Office must install fonts that aren't normally present in a Windows installation, which is what you would presumably get with msttcorefonts. Surely somebody has read the article and can clear up all this conjecture and confusion? :P
The masses must first have the chance to accept. GP is stating that OEMs have so far humoured Intel and MS to the point that most consumers don't really get the choice. Why is it that (last time I checked), the only laptop sold on dell.ca without Windows installed was pink? Why can I buy an Acer Revo with an Atom 330 and Windows, or the much slower Atom 270 with Linux? The OEMs have yet to offer, at least in Canada, equivalent hardware configs to the non-MS crowd, and I tend to believe the GP that this is exactly the way the gorilla wants it.
can 802.11n devices support 802.11a in the same way that the 2.4GHz 802.11g devices supported 802.11b?
11n devices can operate on 2.4, 5.8 or both. Any 11n device running on 5.8GHz, that I've ever seen, also supports 11a. My Ubiquiti Bullet M5, for example, has a drop-down menu where you select mode. The only option is a/n. I assume the Bullet M2 (2.4GHz model), has a similar drop-down menu with some combination of b/g/n options.
Yes, 802.11n can operate in 2.4, 5.8, or both.
Parenthetically, I recently purchase a Bullet M and outdoor antenna from Ubiquiti, and wanting to avoid the whole 2.4GHz zoo, I bought the 5GHz version. This was serendipitous, I thought, when I recently had my internet suspended (bad Telus). Not fearing, I got up on the roof with my 802.11n laptop to search for signals from charitable neighbours. Enabling just 2.4GHz mode on the laptop I could pick up around 10 APs. Switching to 5GHz-only mode, not a single one! So yeah, 5GHz appears to be really good for avoiding competition, not so good if you were hoping to easedrop :(
You're talking about the present state, a snapshot. I'm talking about a model that is gaining traction. As Coward pointed out, some devices already come with the penguin. Sure, not many yet, but I won't die if it doesn't happen by Friday.
It's not without its drawbacks, but overall it's a win. Tech-types will continue to play with/create distros and forks of distros, while those with more mainstream tastes will stick to the big-name distros like Fedora and Ubuntu that happen to have bigger backing, and therefore tend to be better at distilling all this diversity down to a positive, consistent and familiar user experience.
My assertion holds true for Linux proper. Every major distro (heck, even countless end-users) makes its own customizations to the kernel, and many of these are adopted upstream. What Ubuntu has done for the desktop, for example, Red Hat has done for the kernel. And so forth. Even collaboration between legions of MS kernel developers can't equal this effect, because they're all mandated by the same corporate directors. Linux distros, by contrast each have their own nuanced goals and methods, hence true diversity.
Me fail english? That's unpossible!
Admittedly, I speak primarily from a consumer's perspective. My expectation, however unlikely for an independent developer such as yourself, is that if an application proves valuable on one platform, some enterprising individual or company will pick that up and port it to another platform. The onus is not on you. Obviously this ideal poses some problems for small entities working on closed projects, but it serves the consumer very well, which is why closed models, such as those currently embraced by MS and the whole **AA cartel are doomed to give way when their proponents finally run out of steam and adapt or fade into the background.
I won't deny anybody's right to make a living at development, but market forces being what they are, the writing is on the wall, and the successful developers of the future will not be solo pilots, but part of a movement. The open development takes away somewhat from the developer-as-entrepreneur ideal, but the tradeoff, for the state of the art as a whole, is a worthy one.
UNR--Ubuntu Netbook Remix. This is straight from the summary, bless your illiterate soul.
XP--Nobody actually knows what this stands for, but you can call it Windows 5.1 if that makes you feel better.
OS--Operating System.
You're welcome.
Long live diversity. Arguably, one of MS's greatest weaknesses right now is its lack of diversity (ARM et al). The fact that they have conceded to continue selling xp on netbooks is the major reason they haven't been shut out of the growing netbook segment entirely.
Linux, meanwhile, is in every growing market, and although I may run only 2 or three distros personally, these benefit from the work done in dozens of other distros. The fears of a Linux monoculture are misinformed FUD, as long as Red Hat competes with Ubuntu competes with Suse, and so on.
Microsoft has apparently been aware of this flaw since September.
Further evidence that the only "threat" as far as MS is concerned is the threat of a damaged public perception. Although I suppose that's an improvement in itself.
That was my experience too. Disappointing. Add to that the fact that most of the videos I found (through somewhat random clicking) were flash-only. I didn't find any HD content in html5 at all, and I'm not really sure why. To me, h.264 is hi def. Hours and hours of 720p and 1080p on my NAS, and 99% of it is h.264 encoded, so what is youtube's hold up?
Well, if you're right, and I'm right, then we can thank /. for being an ongoing force in ensuring regular Windows updates.
I think speed is everything when you're writing an article for a benchmark site. Note that I'm not disagreeing with your ironic implication that there are other things to look at, but obviously it's a lot easier to churn out some graphs than to try to compare two OSes/suites/whatever on other important metrics, such as security or usability. Leave that to the media troll sites--there's no shortage of them.
Said binary blobs are not part of Linux itself, although they may be part of a Linux distribution. They would be more like Windows than Linux in my original example--closed code that can carry bugs for years without the public ever being aware. It's one reason we 'free software freaks' don't care for binary blobs.
Any code can potentially be compromised. The difference here is that anybody can audit or fix the Linux code, and many people and organisations have and do. So yeah, you're safer using Linux than Windows in that regard.
Recent events seem to suggest that the biggest threats, from MS's point of view, are media exposure and public opinion. The fact that this has now appeared on /. and other media outlets means it will likely be patched in the coming month or so; sooner if people get really loud about it.
Jesus and references to him do not belong on a weapon.
You mean like a cross?
Yes, I'm a Christian, and yes, I pretty much agree with you that it seems like a silly thing to do, but reactions like the GGP are just stunning.
Most hardcore religious types typically seek to impose their beliefs on everyone else.
Citation needed. Seriously, if it offends you to learn that somebody put a nearly-invisible bible reference on a rifle sight, I would love to see your reaction when you find out that American currency has "In God we trust" stamped on it.
And now this from the BBC article:
"Everyone is worried that if they were captured in combat that the enemy would use the Bible quotes against them in captivity or some other form of propaganda."
That's just retarded. Now I'm sitting here trying to imagine how the enemy is going to use a scripture reference on my rifle sight against me. Please, help me out here.
but that's for wireless routers, NOT wired which the parent poster was mainly referring to
I don't see how that's a problem. Wireless routers work fine wired. Disable the wireless if you don't want it. Most of the compatible models are not expensive.
Also, inclusion is very limited, per Tomato's homepage
How many do you need? Some of these are more available than others. Some are less expensive than others, but in the end, once you get Tomato on them, they're all more or less equally functional.
Tomato.
As much as I do love m0n0 and PFS, it's not really the same market. These require x86 hardware, while DLink caters to the low-cost OTC MIPS-type stuff, much more appealing to the non-techie home and SOHO user, to whom I enthusiastically recommend Tomato-compatible hardware, such as the always-on-sale ASUS WL520-gu.
But yeah, I've never understood why DLink is as popular as it is. I've seen countless numbers of those things either fail right out of the box, or begin to fail, either outright or in subtle ways, just months after purchase. I'm not sure similar brands like Trendnet or the Best Buy rebate of the week are any better, and the Linksys brand has certainly gone into the sewer in recent years too, but DLink? That crap is everywhere. It's like the Norton of networking hardware.
True to its Linux heritage, you need to manually edit a file to effect a basic settings change :)
Which gets a bit old sometimes, and then you go back and spend a bit of time in a proprietary OS (take your pick), and realize that in many cases there is no file to edit. Until things get better (and things are gradually getting better), I prefer the open way.
I wonder why Google is placing config files in /usr/bin instead of /etc or /opt.
Placing an editable configuration item in /usr/bin is a bit whacky....
Whacky indeed.
Or why when you post to a discussion on Ubuntu bugs in 2007 the post doesn't show up on /. until 2010.