SUSE doesn't have any real community momentum these days and - at least from what I hear - is still plagued by spiralling dependency problems. Have they or are they going to sort this stuff out?
The documentation and community around Ubuntu is so strong that they'd surely get far less phone-calls if they chose this distribution, while 're-selling' Ubuntu's commercial support option if the customer desired it. In other words, ship with Ubuntu soon/now and just outsource the support to either the community or the paid pros? I'm sure if Dell was to start shipping with Ubuntu pre-installed Mark would consider edging something like 'Feisty' into LTS status.
I would be surprised if the only reason they wouldn't do something like this is to meet MS half way, as their SUSE vendor. It's obvious the most noise regarding Linux on Dell points toward Ubuntu.
Disclaimer: I'm not a daily Ubuntu user, I've just seen users that try it stick to it for a sustained period, whether coming from SUSE, Windows, Fedora or OS X.
Right. I'll just run off an get my copy of Microsoft Office for Linux. Um. Hmm. Don't see one. There's one for OSX and everything but - hang on let me check again - no... That's strange.. Ah well, I'm sure there's a copy of Photoshop for Linux. Lessie - Windows, Mac....hmm. Darn. Well SURELY there's a copy of Flash Developer for Linux. Hmmmm....gosh.
So, this entire corporation is comprised of Flash developers and graphic designers? I think you're talking about the 'design' or 'marketing' department no? Of course, give these specialists Macs if that's what they tell you they need.
Uh - unless we're talking about receptionists stringing together redundant database systems and large-scale host arrays, I think - nay - suspect, that an application - of any kind - might be in order. Then again I haven't checked, does GIMP handle.psd files with decent layer mapping?"
Right, O.K, so a Linux desktop is only useful for database entry. Why then would whole regional and national government administrations in Europe and South America, along with large regions in India and China (whose combined populations would engulf that of America several times) switch their client machines to Linux? As Redhat, Novell and others will testify, the market for desktop Linux in the government sector, is booming to say the least. I'd imagine this is fair proving ground for its place in the corporation.
I think I like the other medicine you were taking.
You can hardly blame the lack of interest in computer science given the prevalence of Windows in education. What on earth about Windows could possibly inspire an inquisitive mind with the desire to learn? Windows is closed source, lacks any customiseability (you know, playing around to see how stuff works) has no proper stdout and half the problems are best solved by waving a rubber chicken at the screen.
You can't expect kids to want to invest time in a marketplace whose default technology is so uninteresting, one monopolised by a greedy mega-corporation that evidences no real interest in the development of computing in general. In fact, it's quite the contrary. Kids exposed only to Windows will quickly realise there's more fun and/or more money to be had elsewhere. Frankly, an MA in Continental Philosphy or Quantum Physics would be more fun, provide more room to make a niche while feeding the brain to greater heights.
If you want kids to take an interest in anything you have to give them the right to tinker, and you have to give them the tools - no strings attached. It's idiocy to soley expose kids to a shrinkwrapped OS at school. Even Apple is better, albeit still with many strings. Be sure to expose them to a BSD, Linux, and Solaris, microcontrollers, network concepts and portable programming languages while still in high-school. Just a taste is enough.
Computing != Microsoft Windows. There's a world of cool stuff out there.
.. of course. I'm not talking about myself. I'm a heavy terminal user and have no interest in bling Beryl on my own machines. I am, however, interested in how this technology can make Linux more useful and attractive for those switching.
Nice but I've seen Beryl videos that make that look pretty pale, at least where
aestheticambitions are concerned:
What's with the aqua scroll-bar rip-off? One thing I find refreshing about returning to Linux after spending time working on a Mac for work is not having to look at a blue and brushed aluminium environment (what's with the metal metaphor?), let alone the default dock-like clone, which is simply annoying on OS X until moved and scaled down. The white-blue-metal-ethericwallpaper combination is tired. Do something else!
Beryl is far more performant on lower hardware than Aqua (and obviously Vista): I look forward to seeing a distribution take Beryl/AIGLX on as a unique challenge to go beyond both Apple and MS where functionality is concerned while still delivering a sexy desktop on lower spec hardware.
P.S I understand that those wobbles and the cube are more tech-demo than practicality but are they really the flag-ship feature of 3D desktops on Linux?
I do understand the difference between a container and a codec. I've been working with Ogg Vorbis in my own interactive projects since it first appeared, distributing my own audio as Ogg Vorbis and more recently streaming video in Ogg Theora.
My point was purely on the basis of mistaking the coupling of these in the name. People don't say "AVI DIVX" they say "DIVX" or "an AVI of DIVX Video". In "Ogg Vorbis" neither the container or the codec are clearly being represented, that's all. Better to just call it 'Vorbis' (though I like 'Ogg' purely as a word).
While the name is memorable, it does pose problems where 'branding' is concerned. I've heard people refer to it as "Ogg", "Egg", "Vorbis" and "Egg Vorbis".
IMHO they should drop the 'Vorbis' (clearly the despotic leader of the gentle Ogg race) and just go for 'Ogg'. This would also tie it neatly into the.ogg extension, which is of course the primary contact people have with the format itself.
The maddening problem of Ogg Theora having a.ogg extension also is, of course, another conversation altogether..
Any education involving computers practically demands piracy as a function of learning these days. I doubt there's a graphic design course in the world whose course fees are more than the total cost of software students do their homework on, let alone film, architecture or engineering degrees. Whole desktop computers cost less than a Photoshop license these days.
The root of the problem is that forced use of proprietary software in education will always lead to this 'theft', whether teacher, student or both. Most students and most schools are barely getting by.
It'll be interesting to see how the intellectual property of this research is delimited. This historical case (top of page) between L'Oreal (now owners of the Body Shop I believe) and a lesser known perfumery, was ruled on the basis that scents are a "work of the mind" and so fall under the same principles of authorship as music and film.
Put simply, is the sea or the scientist the author of this smell? Could this research lab sue another organistion company for producing a similar smell even if not using the same techniques? Similarly, does a field recording of the 'dawn chorus' of toads somewhere in the tropics belong to the toads or the man recording it? I've mixed field recordings (cicadas, birds, wind, thunder) into film in the past, handed to me in the form of a highly protected Sample CD, the likes of which are used again and again in numerous feature-films the world over. The samples themselves have not been consciously treated, they are not 'coloured' in any way (that's the idea of course). Perhaps this same absurdity will carry over to the world of scent reproduction.
The property comprising the OS isn't yours in the first instance, so it's no suprise that it comes with a set of terms and conditions that will restrict your use of that computer to the ends of profit. Proprietary OS's are evolving into retail interfaces where products and services can be sold to the user, the hardware demoted to a strategically throttled support for this exchange. Like many, I have little doubt that once the OS proprietor sees sufficient return made from these 'secondary' revenue streams (via music/video from channel partners, anti-malware applications or whatever), OS's like Vista will be given away for 'free'. Put simply, to run Windows is more akin to renting your computer than owning it. The rent can be 'paid' in many different ways, but it will always be paid. The same goes for OS X, it's just that they actually work hard to make you feel good about this exchange.
If you use a proprietary OS you can feign grief at DRM lock-in and lack of access to the raw hardware (etc etc) but you can't really be outraged or surprised. Any corporation worth its shareholders will always work hard to redirect your better judgement and profit from it. Fighting it is all very well and noble but if you want real change, for you now, stop using the bloody stuff. Complaining about DRM in Vista is like whingeing that the hotelier doesn't let your friends stay over in your hotel room. If you can't switch because the software you need, or think you need, doesn't run on an OS that actually allows you to own your stuff - your supposedly Personal Computer and what is done with/on it- or if you are afraid of the work involved in changing OS, then you've just described the transformative scope of the sacrifice. You are then clear that if you really want freedom to do what you want with your stuff, then you can vote with your courage and switch to an OS allows for this.
Signing petitions is all very well but you know full well the modern Government is, in part, an administrative body managing the interests of corporations that operate within the economic territory known as a 'State'. They only work for you and your interests up until they have your vote and as long as it doesn't threaten the big guys that have the post-democratic influence. They're not idiots. Without smelling like patchouli, if you really want change, be prepared to make the change for yourself. If you don't think you can, or don't want to, then sure, fight on..
It really is a shame that the games tacked on these days tend to be glorified engine demos...
Their evident lack of interest in game-design seems to indicate that technology licensing is their primary business. In that case, yes, their games would merely be saleable tech-demos.
That said, if you're after a deathmatch shooter, it doesn't get much better than id's gear.
Another example. I can't find a descent media player for Debian stable. The VLC build is years old and MPlayer has no Debian compile yet.
Debian Stable is about as far away as being representative of the state of the Linux Desktop as you can get. The age of software packages in Debian Stable is practically a feature. Debian stable runs robots, satellites and has perhaps the best reputation where web-servers are concerned. Is it any wonder Debian developers don't consider updating VLC in the Stable branch a priority?
If you're going to flail around trying to come up with criticisms of the Linux Desktop, grab yourself a distro like Ubuntu, one focussed on out-of-the-box excellence, with recent packages, and then talk to us. Millions use Linux as a primary desktop now, and no they are far from all geeks. Many, myself included, far prefer it to OS X having worked with both.
It is disturbing how people are so quick to generalise and rag on 'Linux', finding the least-common denominator, like a failed Slackware install five years ago or the lack of recent photo-management software in Debian Stable.
North Korea's Chemical and Bioweapons (CBW) program
Wow, not only is their super secret enterprise in English, but they even use provide an easily recallable acronym that's constructed in a way that makes sense to our English minds! Very Handy!
The majority of desktop PC users still refer to the tower under their desk as "the CPU".
Only a small percentage of Apple's potential customer base has any perception they are now running Intel processors, that Apple are not a hardware manufacturing compay, that their entire portables is now manufactured in Taiwan by Quanta Computing - the same company that makes 70% of the world's laptops now. These are obscure 'techy' details to most people.
The knowledge of Apple's switch to Intel seems largely confined to existing Apple users, scandalised Apple fans that believed all Job's denigration of x86 for years prior, geeks and technology journalisists.
..the brain is actually weighing between the pleasure of buying and the pain of forking over the cash.
What? Buying somehow induces pleasure, yet diminishing my personal capital overall somehow registers as some kind of pain? I think I get it..
Research of such prowess, of such searing insight, deserves every tax-paying dollar it can muster. We can only hope no one else somehow - oh, I don't know - builds a business around developing strategies to alleviate this apparent discomfort to our disadvantage.
Good work team, I think you're onto something. Whatever you do, don't stop now!
Re:Response from Kevin Finisterre, second bug
on
Month of Apple Fixes
·
· Score: 1
.. while others are switching from OS X to Linux because they feel more comfortable about the transparency under which security vulnerabilities are handled..
Anyway, as on Linux and on OS X, if you install mplayer you'll still need to find external support to play WMV's. Just as on OS X, as on Linux, if you install VLC you can click a WMV and it'll play.
90% of a good distro is in it's community, in the knowledge base it produces and maintains. No matter how technically good a distro is, it's less useful if there isn't documentation in your language, if a bug isn't noticed by a user, the forums aren't lively, or if people aren't packaging for your distro because no-one's using it - if it doesn't attract developers +/or package maintaners for all these reasons.
For this reason Ubuntu is the winner, hands down, despite being extremely sensibly put together. I'm a Debian user but would never suggest it as a starting distro for a newbie. I have pointed many people at Ubuntu that have very little computer experience, with great success. Some of these people have been running Ubuntu exclusively for over a year now.
The data in ~/ on a machine with one user account is not going to be accessible if/usr or/bin is taken out, the machine won't even boot. The non-savvy Linux user would probably just reinstall in this case, wiping everything out.
While the data in $HOME might be more personally valuable to individual users, the point of privilege separation is to protect the system itself from both external entry attempts, and from a local user him/herself. I believe the passworded SUDO=ALL is a good solution.
So what, evil trojans can run under user rights just fine and cause pretty much the same havoc as with a root account.
I disagree with this. Privilege escalation aside, once a trojan is on a system under a $USER account it can't take it down if it can't write to system files. A rootkit however, seems closer to what you're talking about.
Admittedly I've seen several long time Linux users switch to OS X the last 3 years. Interestingly enough however, four of the five I know are switching back, with three out of those four moving to Ubuntu. The cited reasons are expensive upgrades, performance, lack of customiseability and lack of a working package manager with a good selection of packages (from experience I agree that Fink and Darwin Ports are pretty poor). While developing a project in OS X recently I was surprised to come across many mentions of Ubuntu in Mac-only forums and blogs; it would seem that the Linux mindshare is increasing amongst the die-hard Apple fan.
That said, I have yet to come across more long time OS X users switching to Linux for the reasons Mark Pilgrim and BoingBoing's Doctorow have (to cite just two well known examples). Perhaps this will increase. Linux certainly has a few rough edges, but it's clear that it has unique qualities some consider far more important in the long term, qualities offered only by a committment to free software, in all it's diversity and through its characteristic decentralised development model.
Linux will always be the people's operating system, made by people for people. "Mainstream" or not, it doesn't really matter, Linux is there for people when the use restrictions imposed by corporations seeking capital gain inevitably fail them.
Slashdot Mirror
SUSE doesn't have any real community momentum these days and - at least from what I hear - is still plagued by spiralling dependency problems. Have they or are they going to sort this stuff out?
The documentation and community around Ubuntu is so strong that they'd surely get far less phone-calls if they chose this distribution, while 're-selling' Ubuntu's commercial support option if the customer desired it. In other words, ship with Ubuntu soon/now and just outsource the support to either the community or the paid pros? I'm sure if Dell was to start shipping with Ubuntu pre-installed Mark would consider edging something like 'Feisty' into LTS status.
I would be surprised if the only reason they wouldn't do something like this is to meet MS half way, as their SUSE vendor. It's obvious the most noise regarding Linux on Dell points toward Ubuntu.
Disclaimer: I'm not a daily Ubuntu user, I've just seen users that try it stick to it for a sustained period, whether coming from SUSE, Windows, Fedora or OS X.
I think I like the other medicine you were taking.
You can hardly blame the lack of interest in computer science given the prevalence of Windows in education. What on earth about Windows could possibly inspire an inquisitive mind with the desire to learn? Windows is closed source, lacks any customiseability (you know, playing around to see how stuff works) has no proper stdout and half the problems are best solved by waving a rubber chicken at the screen.
You can't expect kids to want to invest time in a marketplace whose default technology is so uninteresting, one monopolised by a greedy mega-corporation that evidences no real interest in the development of computing in general. In fact, it's quite the contrary. Kids exposed only to Windows will quickly realise there's more fun and/or more money to be had elsewhere. Frankly, an MA in Continental Philosphy or Quantum Physics would be more fun, provide more room to make a niche while feeding the brain to greater heights.
If you want kids to take an interest in anything you have to give them the right to tinker, and you have to give them the tools - no strings attached. It's idiocy to soley expose kids to a shrinkwrapped OS at school. Even Apple is better, albeit still with many strings. Be sure to expose them to a BSD, Linux, and Solaris, microcontrollers, network concepts and portable programming languages while still in high-school. Just a taste is enough.
Computing != Microsoft Windows. There's a world of cool stuff out there.
.. of course. I'm not talking about myself. I'm a heavy terminal user and have no interest in bling Beryl on my own machines. I am, however, interested in how this technology can make Linux more useful and attractive for those switching.
Nice but I've seen Beryl videos that make that look pretty pale, at least where aesthetic ambitions are concerned:
What's with the aqua scroll-bar rip-off? One thing I find refreshing about returning to Linux after spending time working on a Mac for work is not having to look at a blue and brushed aluminium environment (what's with the metal metaphor?), let alone the default dock-like clone, which is simply annoying on OS X until moved and scaled down. The white-blue-metal-ethericwallpaper combination is tired. Do something else!
Beryl is far more performant on lower hardware than Aqua (and obviously Vista): I look forward to seeing a distribution take Beryl/AIGLX on as a unique challenge to go beyond both Apple and MS where functionality is concerned while still delivering a sexy desktop on lower spec hardware.
P.S I understand that those wobbles and the cube are more tech-demo than practicality but are they really the flag-ship feature of 3D desktops on Linux?
Nice one team, first things first!
I do understand the difference between a container and a codec. I've been working with Ogg Vorbis in my own interactive projects since it first appeared, distributing my own audio as Ogg Vorbis and more recently streaming video in Ogg Theora.
My point was purely on the basis of mistaking the coupling of these in the name. People don't say "AVI DIVX" they say "DIVX" or "an AVI of DIVX Video". In "Ogg Vorbis" neither the container or the codec are clearly being represented, that's all. Better to just call it 'Vorbis' (though I like 'Ogg' purely as a word).
While the name is memorable, it does pose problems where 'branding' is concerned. I've heard people refer to it as "Ogg", "Egg", "Vorbis" and "Egg Vorbis".
.ogg extension, which is of course the primary contact people have with the format itself.
.ogg extension also is, of course, another conversation altogether..
IMHO they should drop the 'Vorbis' (clearly the despotic leader of the gentle Ogg race) and just go for 'Ogg'. This would also tie it neatly into the
The maddening problem of Ogg Theora having a
Any education involving computers practically demands piracy as a function of learning these days. I doubt there's a graphic design course in the world whose course fees are more than the total cost of software students do their homework on, let alone film, architecture or engineering degrees. Whole desktop computers cost less than a Photoshop license these days.
The root of the problem is that forced use of proprietary software in education will always lead to this 'theft', whether teacher, student or both. Most students and most schools are barely getting by.
It'll be interesting to see how the intellectual property of this research is delimited. This historical case (top of page) between L'Oreal (now owners of the Body Shop I believe) and a lesser known perfumery, was ruled on the basis that scents are a "work of the mind" and so fall under the same principles of authorship as music and film.
Put simply, is the sea or the scientist the author of this smell? Could this research lab sue another organistion company for producing a similar smell even if not using the same techniques? Similarly, does a field recording of the 'dawn chorus' of toads somewhere in the tropics belong to the toads or the man recording it? I've mixed field recordings (cicadas, birds, wind, thunder) into film in the past, handed to me in the form of a highly protected Sample CD, the likes of which are used again and again in numerous feature-films the world over. The samples themselves have not been consciously treated, they are not 'coloured' in any way (that's the idea of course). Perhaps this same absurdity will carry over to the world of scent reproduction.
The property comprising the OS isn't yours in the first instance, so it's no suprise that it comes with a set of terms and conditions that will restrict your use of that computer to the ends of profit. Proprietary OS's are evolving into retail interfaces where products and services can be sold to the user, the hardware demoted to a strategically throttled support for this exchange. Like many, I have little doubt that once the OS proprietor sees sufficient return made from these 'secondary' revenue streams (via music/video from channel partners, anti-malware applications or whatever), OS's like Vista will be given away for 'free'. Put simply, to run Windows is more akin to renting your computer than owning it. The rent can be 'paid' in many different ways, but it will always be paid. The same goes for OS X, it's just that they actually work hard to make you feel good about this exchange.
If you use a proprietary OS you can feign grief at DRM lock-in and lack of access to the raw hardware (etc etc) but you can't really be outraged or surprised. Any corporation worth its shareholders will always work hard to redirect your better judgement and profit from it. Fighting it is all very well and noble but if you want real change, for you now, stop using the bloody stuff. Complaining about DRM in Vista is like whingeing that the hotelier doesn't let your friends stay over in your hotel room. If you can't switch because the software you need, or think you need, doesn't run on an OS that actually allows you to own your stuff - your supposedly Personal Computer and what is done with/on it- or if you are afraid of the work involved in changing OS, then you've just described the transformative scope of the sacrifice. You are then clear that if you really want freedom to do what you want with your stuff, then you can vote with your courage and switch to an OS allows for this.
Signing petitions is all very well but you know full well the modern Government is, in part, an administrative body managing the interests of corporations that operate within the economic territory known as a 'State'. They only work for you and your interests up until they have your vote and as long as it doesn't threaten the big guys that have the post-democratic influence. They're not idiots. Without smelling like patchouli, if you really want change, be prepared to make the change for yourself. If you don't think you can, or don't want to, then sure, fight on..
To make the data a little more meaningful to Europeans: 835.00 USD = 643.790 EUR.
Source.
oops, i see the error of my ways.
Oh well, there's goes most of the world's skilled developers.. in fact most of the computer using world itself.
That said, if you're after a deathmatch shooter, it doesn't get much better than id's gear.
Quake3, Quake4, RTCW and Doom3 all had/have native Linux clients. I don't know about OS X.
If you're going to flail around trying to come up with criticisms of the Linux Desktop, grab yourself a distro like Ubuntu, one focussed on out-of-the-box excellence, with recent packages, and then talk to us. Millions use Linux as a primary desktop now, and no they are far from all geeks. Many, myself included, far prefer it to OS X having worked with both.
It is disturbing how people are so quick to generalise and rag on 'Linux', finding the least-common denominator, like a failed Slackware install five years ago or the lack of recent photo-management software in Debian Stable.
Low power consumption, PPC, fast. Can we have this in a laptop please?
The majority of desktop PC users still refer to the tower under their desk as "the CPU".
Only a small percentage of Apple's potential customer base has any perception they are now running Intel processors, that Apple are not a hardware manufacturing compay, that their entire portables is now manufactured in Taiwan by Quanta Computing - the same company that makes 70% of the world's laptops now. These are obscure 'techy' details to most people.
The knowledge of Apple's switch to Intel seems largely confined to existing Apple users, scandalised Apple fans that believed all Job's denigration of x86 for years prior, geeks and technology journalisists.
Research of such prowess, of such searing insight, deserves every tax-paying dollar it can muster. We can only hope no one else somehow - oh, I don't know - builds a business around developing strategies to alleviate this apparent discomfort to our disadvantage.
Good work team, I think you're onto something. Whatever you do, don't stop now!
.. while others are switching from OS X to Linux because they feel more comfortable about the transparency under which security vulnerabilities are handled..
Anyway, as on Linux and on OS X, if you install mplayer you'll still need to find external support to play WMV's. Just as on OS X, as on Linux, if you install VLC you can click a WMV and it'll play.
90% of a good distro is in it's community, in the knowledge base it produces and maintains. No matter how technically good a distro is, it's less useful if there isn't documentation in your language, if a bug isn't noticed by a user, the forums aren't lively, or if people aren't packaging for your distro because no-one's using it - if it doesn't attract developers +/or package maintaners for all these reasons.
For this reason Ubuntu is the winner, hands down, despite being extremely sensibly put together. I'm a Debian user but would never suggest it as a starting distro for a newbie. I have pointed many people at Ubuntu that have very little computer experience, with great success. Some of these people have been running Ubuntu exclusively for over a year now.
While the data in $HOME might be more personally valuable to individual users, the point of privilege separation is to protect the system itself from both external entry attempts, and from a local user him/herself. I believe the passworded SUDO=ALL is a good solution. I disagree with this. Privilege escalation aside, once a trojan is on a system under a $USER account it can't take it down if it can't write to system files. A rootkit however, seems closer to what you're talking about.
Admittedly I've seen several long time Linux users switch to OS X the last 3 years. Interestingly enough however, four of the five I know are switching back, with three out of those four moving to Ubuntu. The cited reasons are expensive upgrades, performance, lack of customiseability and lack of a working package manager with a good selection of packages (from experience I agree that Fink and Darwin Ports are pretty poor). While developing a project in OS X recently I was surprised to come across many mentions of Ubuntu in Mac-only forums and blogs; it would seem that the Linux mindshare is increasing amongst the die-hard Apple fan.
That said, I have yet to come across more long time OS X users switching to Linux for the reasons Mark Pilgrim and BoingBoing's Doctorow have (to cite just two well known examples). Perhaps this will increase. Linux certainly has a few rough edges, but it's clear that it has unique qualities some consider far more important in the long term, qualities offered only by a committment to free software, in all it's diversity and through its characteristic decentralised development model.
Linux will always be the people's operating system, made by people for people. "Mainstream" or not, it doesn't really matter, Linux is there for people when the use restrictions imposed by corporations seeking capital gain inevitably fail them.