Two different things, the N810 is my pocket/bed/sofa/car/gps/multimedia device. The Eee is my mobile work partner, I can carry it all day when visiting clients and I will not feel pain on my shoulder and neck after a long day of carrying it. Maybe I could replace the Eee using a bluetooth keyboard with my N810 but the extra inches of the monitor and the ethernet connection are very important for my job. Also having a full Linux distro on the Eee is more flexible than Maemo on the N810. Both devices are good for mobility, but one is pocket size and the other one isn't. So, I recommend buying the two devices:)
Well, I have 1gb on mine and didn't have any memory problem with it. I think that a website that doesn't load on a 512mb computers is bad designed and must be erased from internet:)
And your hard drive will crash if you hit hard your Dell, the SSD of the Eee will not break. (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4dhhl_tests-resistance-chocs-chaleur-froi_tech)
You can put 2gb on the Eee. Why do people always complains about ram and processor speed? People should USE the device and THEN complain if they need more speed or not. The Eee is perfectly balanced for its use and programs. More power is not necessary for the target of the Eee.
Did you use the Eee? It's the perfect device for a mobile world. Well, the internet tablets from Nokia would be the perfect devices but the qwerty keyboard of the Eee puts it in the first place.
You can browse, play videos, music, chat, or do everything you need on that little screen. Sure, you won't feel comfortable using photoshop or any application that needs high resolution monitors, but that's not the target of the Eee.
I'm a happy owner of the following mobile devices:
- Asus Eee - Nokia 770 - Nokia N810
I'd learnt something in these years: we don't need powerfull fat heavy devices, we need smaller and lighter devices, we don't care about power. For power we have fat big desktop computers.
And what are you going to tell to the software engineer (not the one with a diploma, the real one with years of experience) that has been programming since the beginning of the software industry when a "university career" didn't exist? You are going to tell them they need to study in the university? Yeah right.
Yes it is. I'm a Linux user since 1996. The other day I wanted to install Windows XP on a brand new machine and I couldn't because Windows didn't detect my SATA controller. I don't have a floppy drive and that was my first and last eXPerience with XP. So, I don't think Windows XP is easy to install for a regular user, booting Ubuntu from a CD is.
I used Gentoo some years ago (a LOT) and I don't agree with you. Using emerge for Downloading the sources, and waiting until it finishes compiling is not "learning" in anyway.
"Learning" is downloading at hand the sources and compiling it at hand (also the dependencies), not using emerge.
BTW, I still like Gentoo for some servers, but not for a workstation or desktop computer.
Windows XP asks you for a floppy, not CD for drivers (we are talking about low level drivers, like Raid or SATA controlers that will frustrate your installation of you don't have them). And Linux has this problem solved years ago, Vista is NEW.
That's because they can't copy Linux code anymore:)
> The algorithm would take 1 person a maximum of 1/2 a day to program, and test, even if they weren't a good programmer. Spending 6 years on Vista and
> they can't even add simple features like this, that would make so many home user's lives easier, is just terrible.
I don't agree. I installed Ubuntu on my new machine and everything worked out of the box. I tried to install Windows XP and it didn't detect my SATA drives, i had to use floppy drives (god, in 2007 we still have to use floppy drives!). After that, my Webcam, Hauppage WinTV-150 card and HP printer worked without doing anything in Ubuntu, in Windows I had to install drivers. So please tell me why is easier to install and setup hardware in Windows?
Difficult to install? That's only for Linux from Scratch. All other distros are easier than Windows to install. Have you tried to install Windows XP on a new machine? It's a pain in the ass... remember to have a floppy drive before trying it.
Slashdot Mirror
Two different things, the N810 is my pocket/bed/sofa/car/gps/multimedia device. The Eee is my mobile work partner, I can carry it all day when visiting clients and I will not feel pain on my shoulder and neck after a long day of carrying it. Maybe I could replace the Eee using a bluetooth keyboard with my N810 but the extra inches of the monitor and the ethernet connection are very important for my job. Also having a full Linux distro on the Eee is more flexible than Maemo on the N810. :)
Both devices are good for mobility, but one is pocket size and the other one isn't.
So, I recommend buying the two devices
Well, I have 1gb on mine and didn't have any memory problem with it. I think that a website that doesn't load on a 512mb computers is bad designed and must be erased from internet :)
And your hard drive will crash if you hit hard your Dell, the SSD of the Eee will not break. (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4dhhl_tests-resistance-chocs-chaleur-froi_tech)
You can put 2gb on the Eee. Why do people always complains about ram and processor speed? People should USE the device and THEN complain if they need more speed or not. The Eee is perfectly balanced for its use and programs. More power is not necessary for the target of the Eee.
Did you use the Eee? It's the perfect device for a mobile world. Well, the internet tablets from Nokia would be the perfect devices but the qwerty keyboard of the Eee puts it in the first place. You can browse, play videos, music, chat, or do everything you need on that little screen. Sure, you won't feel comfortable using photoshop or any application that needs high resolution monitors, but that's not the target of the Eee.
I'm a happy owner of the following mobile devices:
- Asus Eee
- Nokia 770
- Nokia N810
I'd learnt something in these years: we don't need powerfull fat heavy devices, we need smaller and lighter devices, we don't care about power. For power we have fat big desktop computers.
I'm sure they don't use firefox :)
Who uses hotmail anyway?
And what are you going to tell to the software engineer (not the one with a diploma, the real one with years of experience) that has been programming since the beginning of the software industry when a "university career" didn't exist? You are going to tell them they need to study in the university? Yeah right.
Monkey Island for ever. I don't care about new games.
Yes it is. I'm a Linux user since 1996. The other day I wanted to install Windows XP on a brand new machine and I couldn't because Windows didn't detect my SATA controller. I don't have a floppy drive and that was my first and last eXPerience with XP. So, I don't think Windows XP is easy to install for a regular user, booting Ubuntu from a CD is.
Ok, that's a nice solution for advanced users. But where is the "Windows is easy to install for a normal user" there?
I used Gentoo some years ago (a LOT) and I don't agree with you. Using emerge for Downloading the sources, and waiting until it finishes compiling is not "learning" in anyway. "Learning" is downloading at hand the sources and compiling it at hand (also the dependencies), not using emerge.
BTW, I still like Gentoo for some servers, but not for a workstation or desktop computer.
Windows XP asks you for a floppy, not CD for drivers (we are talking about low level drivers, like Raid or SATA controlers that will frustrate your installation of you don't have them). And Linux has this problem solved years ago, Vista is NEW.
Try to install Windows on a server with Raid or on a simple New PC with new SATA controllers, you will need drivers on a FLOPPY disk.
Usually, lastest Linux distros have more drivers than Windows XP out of the box without the need of extra floppy disks or cds...
Well, I think Gentoo is more "time wasting" than "difficult" :)
But yes, I think it should be difficult for a desktop user.
Why we keep saying "using Windows apps in Linux..."? We don't want to use Windows apps in Linux, we want to use Linux apps.
It seems you never did an advanced installation of Windows XP for hardware with RAID or SATA controllers not supported by Windows...
That's because they can't copy Linux code anymore :)
> The algorithm would take 1 person a maximum of 1/2 a day to program, and test, even if they weren't a good programmer. Spending 6 years on Vista and
> they can't even add simple features like this, that would make so many home user's lives easier, is just terrible.
Gutsy 7.10 beta is a BETA. You shouldn't be using it if you are not a beta tester or developer. Try with 7.04
I don't agree. I installed Ubuntu on my new machine and everything worked out of the box. I tried to install Windows XP and it didn't detect my SATA drives, i had to use floppy drives (god, in 2007 we still have to use floppy drives!). After that, my Webcam, Hauppage WinTV-150 card and HP printer worked without doing anything in Ubuntu, in Windows I had to install drivers. So please tell me why is easier to install and setup hardware in Windows?
Difficult to install? That's only for Linux from Scratch. All other distros are easier than Windows to install. Have you tried to install Windows XP on a new machine? It's a pain in the ass... remember to have a floppy drive before trying it.
A license for each audio track, that's the solution Sony.