Ironically, the install process is probably what I view as one of the easier portions - 2 floppies, net install and go - I've yet to see a slicker installation.
Configuration I will agree is not geared toward the novice.
I've been given the task to rearchitect a group of servers that run HLDS (half life dedicated server). This application is a linux binary-only distro, and considering they have locations all over the US, remote administration is the only way to fly.
The options I gave them are Debian stable and FreeBSD. Realistically, I would choose the latter, even if I need to use the compatibility layer. FreeBSD is made to do work like this, and while Debian is similar in goal, it's outdated packages in stable make working with fresh hardware a bigger chore than it should be. Otherwise, I would be all over it.
RHEL hasn't given me a compelling reason to cheer yet. Perhaps I'm missing the suit and tie required to understand their view of "enterprise linux".
Yes, I will agree that it's better than most. However,/sbin/runscript or whatever it's called is just silly considering, it's either a patched bash or a shell script that sits on top. I'd rather have a protocol like BSD, Slack, or Debian where you include system libraries to access system functions, giving me more of an option.
Well, as someone who uses ARD and RDP a lot, X as a network protocol is long in the tooth by today's standards. It's just barely above VNC as far as network usage is concerned, especially because it was meant to render Widget sets like Motif and Xt and now it's doing GTK and Enlightenment.
Besides, terminal server has been out for years, if that's what you need.
I know this is a dirty word on slashdot, but have you tried FreeBSD?
From what you're describing, it sounds like it'd be right up your alley. Slack is very BSD-like (or at least, it used to be) and you'll feel right at home, and it's network installer, IMO, has yet to be beat (2 floppies + network connection, 1 working system an hour later - painless).
I had the same problem you experienced with Mandrake with both SuSE and FC2. Although, these days I'm using a mac as my workstation - can't be beat if you can afford it.
I guess this works for some people, but as someone who works with most of his machines remotely, Fedora is a giant piece of poo.
The symlink/script mess that is SELinux is not fun to play with when you are trying to install third party packages. Sure, your GUI tool may be nice, but I guess I have better things to do than to wait for a X window to refresh between the west coast and chicago.
It's a disturbing linux trend and bothers me quite a bit - many systems contort rc.d beyond comprehension - good luck writing init scripts that properly load on boot without having to run an obscene number of shell scripts and touch a few config files. gentoo has a whole damn bourne shell "replacement" for running init scripts. It's disgusting. And it's guaranteed to be different on every linux distribution, and often between releases as well.
And it seems, that a great deal of the work being done today is to make linux more useful on the desktop - strangely, I feel like I'm being alienated on the server.
I think that debian and slackware are the only systems left that have any sanity in the linux world.
I agree. Also, with the ubiquity of "fat clients", often times developers don't even bother to ask - they "demo" software long before they buy it.
It's easy to blame it on the managers, but the developers don't help by inflating the problem, promoting the piracy of software where an actual demo would have been more fruitful.
Dev: "Hey, I signed up for a demo of this. I put your email address in the form." Manager: "Ok." (2 weeks later) Dev: "I need this whiz-bang feature that the demo doesn't support. I won't be able to continue until I get it working." Manager: "Write up a PO and put it on my desk."
Often times, that'll get you software by the end of the week. It's worked for me many times... Where as the alternative (which I have done), normally gets the response, "we already have it, why do we need to buy it?".
Considering that you a reading a site that most serious computer types address as a tabloid for geeks, I wouldn't say you're much farther away from dull than he is.
Your attitude blows. It's as if because you do something special, you are more special than anyone else.
You are a classic conceited know-it-all. I'm glad your house and electrical work are great - want to disprove a few critical portions of Quantum Physics because you are so damn smart?
Or you can just write a matrix multiplication program in APL. You can do that too, right?
"Back in the day" you were someone we would ask questions but never invite to social functions.
This is one of the (many) reasons that I support FreeBSD.
The GPL asks for too much trust out of a group of organisms who, historically, have violated that trust time and time again.
Leave your car intentionally unlocked and in a busy parking lot. Come back a week later. You might be lucky to see it again, probably if you live in a small town. As a result, you'll find little provisions all over your insurance contracts and state law against doing this. Of course, there are other reasons for these laws, but I don't want to digress on the reasons someone would do that.
What I'm saying is that it's hard to get mad as if you didn't expect it was going to happen - it's going to happen, your hopes is that it doesn't, but you shouldn't have any delusion that it won't.
The BSD camp, I guess, holds no such delusion. Another advantage of this method is that, while people may not always agree with how it's changed, there are too many cases of BSD code being adopted into commercial programs, improved, and sent back as a result. Darwin and the many changes in Mac OS X are easily shining examples of this - Microsoft's adoption of a good deal of BSD's IP stack and Kerberos (which is a MIT license, but we're talking nitpicks in difference here) help drive standards that might have otherwise been completely screwed (as we all know what MS has done to those two) without that help.
Anyways, I know this argument is old-hat, I guess my point is that this is going to happen frequently, and the more GPL code out there, the more this is going to be a problem. So if you feel that GPL'd code needs to be protected, you need to defend it. How you choose to defend it might be a little different than the RIAA chooses too, but it should be no less of a concern.
For all of RMS's faults, he's pretty good about taking care of this stuff. So if you like the GPL but have a problem with supporting the FSF, you have conflicting goals. Send them money.
iTunes is just as free as Winamp is, perhaps more - Apple isn't charging for Windows Media support.:)
Sadly though, Winamp would win not because it's a better program but because iTunes is a slow, buggy, steaming pile of poo on Windows. On the mac, it's slick and the features it provides are hard to argue with when you factor it's speed into the picture.
It always amazed me when I told people how elated I was with iTunes and they would disagree with me, and then I tried it out on Windows, and it all made sense. Things like "smart playlists" combined with ratings and numerous amounts of little things really make it worthwhile, and I don't have an iPod or use iTMS.
I don't think this is anyone's fault but Apple, to be honest.
IIRC (and please correct me if I'm wrong, just this is how I remember it panning out)
Nullsoft released the initial Gnutella client with the intention of Open Sourcing it.
Within a day of release, AOL put a stop to that. You might be able to find all this in the/. archives.
Those who had copies of the clients started producing hacks of it and documenting the current protocol, and that's what lead to Gnutella 2, which is what most clients use today.
They're just getting more attention - remember, in the 'hey-day' of the other tech you cited the internet itself was relatively obscure.
Although, while I certainly agree with your assertion about the pre-spam newsgroups, I wouldn't tout that as a good thing. For some reason, online still equates to complete lack of moderation.
I guess "separate but equal" works better for you? I am amazed that you cite the deprecation of civil liberties as a problem but in the same breath defile the concept of equality.
You were taking a gamble if you were voting for Bush because Ashcroft was leaving. I'm not saying voting for Kerry would have been any less of a gamble, but, well, it's red (scalding hot) or blue (freezing cold) with the populace it seems. Warm just doesn't seem to cut it.
as this election cycle has shown, there's lots of those around.
Actually, I would argue that the combination is old, and the pieces are new.
Too many times I see developers who write libraries that already exist because it's missing such a small tidbit of functionality - what amazes me is that they do this due to a convenient language construct or adoption of a design paradigm. Too often the NIH syndrome could be solved with simple wrappers.
But the applications are essentially the same - web browser, mail application, desktop shell. The Mac touts it's "revolutionary" interface, but it's still square windows, titles at top, and pointers to the application. It's what's between all that that's different.
FORTRAN and C are great examples in many ways of designs that work, not because they're good, but because they're somewhat universally adopted. Both languages have standards boards, compilers go to great lengths to meet the standards, and then the compilers and development environments expand on that with API's and "frills". The result is that, in general, compilers for C and FORTRAN are unarguably some of the best code generators as far as languages go.
However, C++ is still getting trouble getting people to adopt the STL. I imagine it's only a matter of time, but the fact that GNU has the most complete STL implementation says quite a bit about the goals of commercial compilers. VC++ is touted as having a great IDE by many, but it's STL support is anemic in comparison to what we have on the GNU side. One could say that the Windows API eliminates much of the need for the STL.
Take this problem and extend it to applications, and you'll see a similar problem - doing web pages is a pain in the ass, not because the "glue" is different, but because there are 3 renderers for at least 3 browsers. Gecko and KHTML are going a long way, but Microsoft and Opera will most certainly not be giving up their own renderers anytime soon.
And that leaves us web developers writing user-agent dependent CSS and HTML pushers. And that makes browsers setup features which change the user agent. It's a needless cycle and unfortunate for everyone - yes, even microsoft. It costs money to maintain IE, and I don't know anyone who's actually using Windows because it has IE on it (now or before). They have different reasons.
A great example of all of this is GNOME vs. KDE. Basically your choice in development revolves around whether you want to use C or C++. The KDE C support is relatively anemic and likewise for the GNOME C++ scenario. Of course, I haven't been paying attention for several years, so this might have finally changed. The fact that they're just starting to place nice with ORB implementations is just disgusting.
What gives you the right to tell people what they can do with their money?
Not everyone inherits money you know, but everyone is subject to the same rules. That vast wealth came from somewhere, and almost always it can be referenced to hard work, effort, determination, and wit.
Personally, I don't think anyone should be required to give to charity, and I think the death tax is pretty stupid.
However, I think it's best for the greater good that we do give back. However, I'm not so pretentious to cram my viewpoint down other people's throat.
People with wealth and success have power because they are desirable people, they make things happen, whether it requires a pen and a checkbook or an uncommon set of skills which gave them that wealth and success.
It amazes me how people blame those who are, on paper, better off them them. It's like you're mad because you feel the need to supplant the hatred that they are better than you - when in fact they're not. In your hatred you justify and uphold the perception that they are better than you, and the cycle continues.
In reality, no one is going to make anyone else better than the other.
"Hike Taxes" - the rich man will get a better accountant, but what is the poor man to do?
"Social Services" - Why place a tax on those who can help themselves? Why not encourage a culture which fosters this autonomously? I said encourage, not enforce. Subsidize medical for those who cannot afford the best doctors, but allow those who can the ability to choose.
What you are arguing is no better than many dictators and caste systems argue - that one group of people is better than another. In your case, you are arguing that "progressive" is better than the merely rich. The GP is arguing that the rich are providing a service that others cannot. I agree with his argument, but it is too broad. Unfortuately it's the broad approach that plagues the republican party, and your approach is too wildly in the opposite direction to be reasonable, either.
If the democrats were in control we'd be in debt because everything imaginable would be free to anyone who "couldn't afford" it. Free services do not give anyone an incentive to better themselves and the problem only gets deeper.
If the republicans were in control, everything would be corporatized. While jobs would boom initially, as soon as it became a pure "buyer's market", people's wages would resemble the price of heads of cattle. Keep in mind that our quality of living, even with outsourcing, is considerably better than the average.
Neither situation is realistic from a "pure" standpoint. An even system does a lot of good at moderating the solution but there has to be more moderate viewpoints to smooth things out.
I just don't get why people take extremely hard party lines - it's idiotic and gets very close to adhering to fascist concepts. I know this is a Crossfire generation, but jesus people, think for yourself.
Before you label me as a troll, the only confirmed truth that the GP posted was that GWB was re-elected. Everything else is little more than random speculation, weighing on words.
It's just kind of sad that people want a fair election but that all goes out the window when the person they wanted elected didn't win, and fairly at that.
I'm sorry: "Rah rah rah! GWB is a douchebag and a lot more than 51% of the population disagrees with me, but that doesn't matter because I'm sad and I want to cry loudly about it! To hell with fair elections, I want Kerry!"
Slashdot Mirror
Ironically, the install process is probably what I view as one of the easier portions - 2 floppies, net install and go - I've yet to see a slicker installation.
Configuration I will agree is not geared toward the novice.
I've been given the task to rearchitect a group of servers that run HLDS (half life dedicated server). This application is a linux binary-only distro, and considering they have locations all over the US, remote administration is the only way to fly.
The options I gave them are Debian stable and FreeBSD. Realistically, I would choose the latter, even if I need to use the compatibility layer. FreeBSD is made to do work like this, and while Debian is similar in goal, it's outdated packages in stable make working with fresh hardware a bigger chore than it should be. Otherwise, I would be all over it.
RHEL hasn't given me a compelling reason to cheer yet. Perhaps I'm missing the suit and tie required to understand their view of "enterprise linux".
Yes, I will agree that it's better than most. However, /sbin/runscript or whatever it's called is just silly considering, it's either a patched bash or a shell script that sits on top. I'd rather have a protocol like BSD, Slack, or Debian where you include system libraries to access system functions, giving me more of an option.
Considering I've done it on Mac, Linux, and Windows, I suggest you research the solution.
Terminal Server can do this rather easily. RDC will give you the whole desktop, but can do it nonetheless.
And KDE's "rdesktop" speaks RDC.
A good reply to that is often,
"Here's a pink slip."
If you're in a position where you can say that often and get away with it, you probably aren't worrying about getting the software you need.
Agh!
I guess I'm just amazed that a "review" of "linux" is basically a bunch of criticisms of X.
Try 'visudo', for crying out loud. It's a very clean and easy to use interface.
Well, as someone who uses ARD and RDP a lot, X as a network protocol is long in the tooth by today's standards. It's just barely above VNC as far as network usage is concerned, especially because it was meant to render Widget sets like Motif and Xt and now it's doing GTK and Enlightenment.
Besides, terminal server has been out for years, if that's what you need.
I know this is a dirty word on slashdot, but have you tried FreeBSD?
From what you're describing, it sounds like it'd be right up your alley. Slack is very BSD-like (or at least, it used to be) and you'll feel right at home, and it's network installer, IMO, has yet to be beat (2 floppies + network connection, 1 working system an hour later - painless).
I had the same problem you experienced with Mandrake with both SuSE and FC2. Although, these days I'm using a mac as my workstation - can't be beat if you can afford it.
I guess this works for some people, but as someone who works with most of his machines remotely, Fedora is a giant piece of poo.
The symlink/script mess that is SELinux is not fun to play with when you are trying to install third party packages. Sure, your GUI tool may be nice, but I guess I have better things to do than to wait for a X window to refresh between the west coast and chicago.
It's a disturbing linux trend and bothers me quite a bit - many systems contort rc.d beyond comprehension - good luck writing init scripts that properly load on boot without having to run an obscene number of shell scripts and touch a few config files. gentoo has a whole damn bourne shell "replacement" for running init scripts. It's disgusting. And it's guaranteed to be different on every linux distribution, and often between releases as well.
And it seems, that a great deal of the work being done today is to make linux more useful on the desktop - strangely, I feel like I'm being alienated on the server.
I think that debian and slackware are the only systems left that have any sanity in the linux world.
I agree. Also, with the ubiquity of "fat clients", often times developers don't even bother to ask - they "demo" software long before they buy it.
It's easy to blame it on the managers, but the developers don't help by inflating the problem, promoting the piracy of software where an actual demo would have been more fruitful.
Dev: "Hey, I signed up for a demo of this. I put your email address in the form."
Manager: "Ok."
(2 weeks later)
Dev: "I need this whiz-bang feature that the demo doesn't support. I won't be able to continue until I get it working."
Manager: "Write up a PO and put it on my desk."
Often times, that'll get you software by the end of the week. It's worked for me many times... Where as the alternative (which I have done), normally gets the response, "we already have it, why do we need to buy it?".
Ah, cool! Thanks.
Considering that you a reading a site that most serious computer types address as a tabloid for geeks, I wouldn't say you're much farther away from dull than he is.
Your attitude blows. It's as if because you do something special, you are more special than anyone else.
You are a classic conceited know-it-all. I'm glad your house and electrical work are great - want to disprove a few critical portions of Quantum Physics because you are so damn smart?
Or you can just write a matrix multiplication program in APL. You can do that too, right?
"Back in the day" you were someone we would ask questions but never invite to social functions.
This is one of the (many) reasons that I support FreeBSD.
The GPL asks for too much trust out of a group of organisms who, historically, have violated that trust time and time again.
Leave your car intentionally unlocked and in a busy parking lot. Come back a week later. You might be lucky to see it again, probably if you live in a small town. As a result, you'll find little provisions all over your insurance contracts and state law against doing this. Of course, there are other reasons for these laws, but I don't want to digress on the reasons someone would do that.
What I'm saying is that it's hard to get mad as if you didn't expect it was going to happen - it's going to happen, your hopes is that it doesn't, but you shouldn't have any delusion that it won't.
The BSD camp, I guess, holds no such delusion. Another advantage of this method is that, while people may not always agree with how it's changed, there are too many cases of BSD code being adopted into commercial programs, improved, and sent back as a result. Darwin and the many changes in Mac OS X are easily shining examples of this - Microsoft's adoption of a good deal of BSD's IP stack and Kerberos (which is a MIT license, but we're talking nitpicks in difference here) help drive standards that might have otherwise been completely screwed (as we all know what MS has done to those two) without that help.
Anyways, I know this argument is old-hat, I guess my point is that this is going to happen frequently, and the more GPL code out there, the more this is going to be a problem. So if you feel that GPL'd code needs to be protected, you need to defend it. How you choose to defend it might be a little different than the RIAA chooses too, but it should be no less of a concern.
For all of RMS's faults, he's pretty good about taking care of this stuff. So if you like the GPL but have a problem with supporting the FSF, you have conflicting goals. Send them money.
iTunes is just as free as Winamp is, perhaps more - Apple isn't charging for Windows Media support. :)
Sadly though, Winamp would win not because it's a better program but because iTunes is a slow, buggy, steaming pile of poo on Windows. On the mac, it's slick and the features it provides are hard to argue with when you factor it's speed into the picture.
It always amazed me when I told people how elated I was with iTunes and they would disagree with me, and then I tried it out on Windows, and it all made sense. Things like "smart playlists" combined with ratings and numerous amounts of little things really make it worthwhile, and I don't have an iPod or use iTMS.
I don't think this is anyone's fault but Apple, to be honest.
IIRC (and please correct me if I'm wrong, just this is how I remember it panning out)
/. archives.
Nullsoft released the initial Gnutella client with the intention of Open Sourcing it.
Within a day of release, AOL put a stop to that. You might be able to find all this in the
Those who had copies of the clients started producing hacks of it and documenting the current protocol, and that's what lead to Gnutella 2, which is what most clients use today.
Listen.
You are in the minority, you idiot.
You want to keep agreeing with me?
They're just getting more attention - remember, in the 'hey-day' of the other tech you cited the internet itself was relatively obscure.
Although, while I certainly agree with your assertion about the pre-spam newsgroups, I wouldn't tout that as a good thing. For some reason, online still equates to complete lack of moderation.
I guess "separate but equal" works better for you? I am amazed that you cite the deprecation of civil liberties as a problem but in the same breath defile the concept of equality.
You were taking a gamble if you were voting for Bush because Ashcroft was leaving. I'm not saying voting for Kerry would have been any less of a gamble, but, well, it's red (scalding hot) or blue (freezing cold) with the populace it seems. Warm just doesn't seem to cut it.
as this election cycle has shown, there's lots of those around.
We certainly agree there.
Actually, I would argue that the combination is old, and the pieces are new.
Too many times I see developers who write libraries that already exist because it's missing such a small tidbit of functionality - what amazes me is that they do this due to a convenient language construct or adoption of a design paradigm. Too often the NIH syndrome could be solved with simple wrappers.
But the applications are essentially the same - web browser, mail application, desktop shell. The Mac touts it's "revolutionary" interface, but it's still square windows, titles at top, and pointers to the application. It's what's between all that that's different.
FORTRAN and C are great examples in many ways of designs that work, not because they're good, but because they're somewhat universally adopted. Both languages have standards boards, compilers go to great lengths to meet the standards, and then the compilers and development environments expand on that with API's and "frills". The result is that, in general, compilers for C and FORTRAN are unarguably some of the best code generators as far as languages go.
However, C++ is still getting trouble getting people to adopt the STL. I imagine it's only a matter of time, but the fact that GNU has the most complete STL implementation says quite a bit about the goals of commercial compilers. VC++ is touted as having a great IDE by many, but it's STL support is anemic in comparison to what we have on the GNU side. One could say that the Windows API eliminates much of the need for the STL.
Take this problem and extend it to applications, and you'll see a similar problem - doing web pages is a pain in the ass, not because the "glue" is different, but because there are 3 renderers for at least 3 browsers. Gecko and KHTML are going a long way, but Microsoft and Opera will most certainly not be giving up their own renderers anytime soon.
And that leaves us web developers writing user-agent dependent CSS and HTML pushers. And that makes browsers setup features which change the user agent. It's a needless cycle and unfortunate for everyone - yes, even microsoft. It costs money to maintain IE, and I don't know anyone who's actually using Windows because it has IE on it (now or before). They have different reasons.
A great example of all of this is GNOME vs. KDE. Basically your choice in development revolves around whether you want to use C or C++. The KDE C support is relatively anemic and likewise for the GNOME C++ scenario. Of course, I haven't been paying attention for several years, so this might have finally changed. The fact that they're just starting to place nice with ORB implementations is just disgusting.
... What kind of compiler do I need to build Open Source politics? Is the configure script m4, or is it a make file? If it's make, is it BSD, GNU?
Seriously, am I the only one that thinks labelling everything "grassroots" as "open source" is pretty freakin' stupid?
So let me get this straight.
You counter my assertion with comment about how it is too general and then make another one of your own, that is obviously general?
Let me explain.
The united way might be happy about your $10 donation.
However, the united way doesn't call their publicist when you do. Does that make sense?
Hello Knee Jerk-Off,
What gives you the right to tell people what they can do with their money?
Not everyone inherits money you know, but everyone is subject to the same rules. That vast wealth came from somewhere, and almost always it can be referenced to hard work, effort, determination, and wit.
Personally, I don't think anyone should be required to give to charity, and I think the death tax is pretty stupid.
However, I think it's best for the greater good that we do give back. However, I'm not so pretentious to cram my viewpoint down other people's throat.
People with wealth and success have power because they are desirable people, they make things happen, whether it requires a pen and a checkbook or an uncommon set of skills which gave them that wealth and success.
It amazes me how people blame those who are, on paper, better off them them. It's like you're mad because you feel the need to supplant the hatred that they are better than you - when in fact they're not. In your hatred you justify and uphold the perception that they are better than you, and the cycle continues.
In reality, no one is going to make anyone else better than the other.
"Hike Taxes" - the rich man will get a better accountant, but what is the poor man to do?
"Social Services" - Why place a tax on those who can help themselves? Why not encourage a culture which fosters this autonomously? I said encourage, not enforce. Subsidize medical for those who cannot afford the best doctors, but allow those who can the ability to choose.
What you are arguing is no better than many dictators and caste systems argue - that one group of people is better than another. In your case, you are arguing that "progressive" is better than the merely rich. The GP is arguing that the rich are providing a service that others cannot. I agree with his argument, but it is too broad. Unfortuately it's the broad approach that plagues the republican party, and your approach is too wildly in the opposite direction to be reasonable, either.
If the democrats were in control we'd be in debt because everything imaginable would be free to anyone who "couldn't afford" it. Free services do not give anyone an incentive to better themselves and the problem only gets deeper.
If the republicans were in control, everything would be corporatized. While jobs would boom initially, as soon as it became a pure "buyer's market", people's wages would resemble the price of heads of cattle. Keep in mind that our quality of living, even with outsourcing, is considerably better than the average.
Neither situation is realistic from a "pure" standpoint. An even system does a lot of good at moderating the solution but there has to be more moderate viewpoints to smooth things out.
I just don't get why people take extremely hard party lines - it's idiotic and gets very close to adhering to fascist concepts. I know this is a Crossfire generation, but jesus people, think for yourself.
All a blog is, is a CMS for a single person, really.
Chips n' Bits would have been a "blog", I've been doing them for years before I heard the word - I just always called it a "journal".
The word is kind of silly and is misleading. But unfortunately it's what a lot of people understand, so it's used often. (pejorative)
Before you label me as a troll, the only confirmed truth that the GP posted was that GWB was re-elected. Everything else is little more than random speculation, weighing on words.
It's just kind of sad that people want a fair election but that all goes out the window when the person they wanted elected didn't win, and fairly at that.
They were right and they still got flogged.
I guess inference isn't your strong point.
I'm sorry: "Rah rah rah! GWB is a douchebag and a lot more than 51% of the population disagrees with me, but that doesn't matter because I'm sad and I want to cry loudly about it! To hell with fair elections, I want Kerry!"