I have 13 PCs, all running Linux/UNIX, except 1 Windoze machine for MIDI. I don't own a DVD.
My sister is an art student with a mac. My cousin is a lawyer with a Toshiba laptop; both have DVD's. The cousin has a standalone DVD recorder/player plugged into her TV.
I'm pretty sure neither of them use their devices for X-Files or Star Trek. It's Sex in the City and Sopranos.
The reason the "Industry" is getting perturbed is not because a couple (trust me, we're quite the minority; if you don't believe me go work a help desk at an ISP for a month) nerds want Voyager. It's because my cousin wants Sex in the City.
There are quite a few posts of the form: make xconfig && make dep && make clean && make bzImage && make modules && modules_install && reboot
Depending on your hardware that's a 5 - 30 minute process. Most of the time spent on kernel configuration is in make menuconfig (xconfig -or- config). This is where you make decisions on what drivers/features you will need/include. Keep in mind that the above won't always boot the machine if one of the decisions is made incorrectly.
When a distro is first installed, it always has a working hardware footprint by definition. Running through the options/features that are working for the install process to create a.config that would reproduce this kernel after reboot would save a great deal of time and effort. Especially, with those.config options that can only be decided upon through trial and error.
Model XL300 I picked up for $300 and about $200 in parts. Was running 2.4.2 on Slackware 7.x fine for about 7 months until trying to upgrade the kernel. Tried 2.4.10 - 2.4.17 and none of them would even build. There's some discussion about CONFIG_HOTPLUG on 2.4.16. Although this issue deals with 2.2.20 the asm/pci.h hack was necessary to get 2.4.9 to build. But, that one wouldn't boot...
I finally found the 2.4.9-ac1 (an Alan Cox) kernel builds and appears stable. This isn't a complaint, but there were some concerning points made in discussions about kernel branches in researching how to get this kernel in place; one in particular a couple weeks on Slashdot.
Again, this is not a complaint: the XL300 was originally targeted for the NT 4.0 market. Guess what....
Linux tempe 2.4.9-ac1 #1 Tue Jan 15 11:04:17 MST 2002 alpha unknown
You should definitely sit down and document the procedure you used to set your friend's box up, and post it somewhere. Perhaps the Linux Desktop for Newbies HOWTO.
Some additional things to consider in this is the changing of DNS and other network settings over time that might cause problems for the end-user, since they don't know how to fix it, or can't give root to someone who can. Of course, if they did find someone who could, absence of root passwd isn't really a problem, anyway.
It's not so much a question of whether Joe Public can understand (while he/she probably cannot), but of whether he should have to invest the time in giving legal recourse to a service provider. Qwest should require a signature on the document from each customer to secure legal absolution from sharing data. If every one of your service providers did this, you'd spend your whole life reading contracts....
Unless of course you happen to be looking for a kernel stable enough to run a milo-based Alpha, or something. Kernels in Linus' tree won't compile after 2.4.3; in Alan's tree after 2.4.9-ac1 they compile but don't boot my XL300. Granted it's pretty arcane hardware, but it still works and I want to use it for something. Wasting countless hours on deciding which and attempting to compile/boot umpteen kernels is not a good use of time. There's already production/development; Alan/Linus, and several other kernel tress. It's important that one of them remains stable and solid code.
How can anyone keep up with Micro$oft? Answer is they can't until the Gov't enforces the law.
Until someone on the Government's side puts a foot down on M$'s ranglings the industry will stay stagnant, people will only code for M$ technologies and 50% of the revenue produced by software development will continue to go to Redmond for licensing fees. Innovative software that's useful will continue to not exist. I'd pay for Cakewalk or ProTools for Linux, but no one's going to develop that software when no one will buy it unless it's written for Windoze.
Not using WinXP might not cut it, but it's certainly a step in the right direction...
Whatever you may think about Linus, he certainly remains pretty noncommittal about the future of Linux, and that has to make some PHBs somewhat uncomfortable. I wouldn't be suprized to see someone put some spin on:
"If I were to make a prediction right now, which I?m not going to, if that prediction actually came true, I?d be really disappointed."
indicating a lack of direction. But, with mention of IBM and the way the license has been set up, he almost seems willing to pass on the torch.
"People are doing things with Linux that I?m frankly not that interested in, and that?s fine."
Who's editing content for Cisco? At the time I hit the link this was displayed at the bottom:
if (_sv==10){if (document.cookie.indexOf("CP=")!=-1){_ce="y";}else { document.cookie="CP=null*; path=/; expires=Wed, 1 Jan 2020 00:00:00 GMT"; _ce=(document.cookie.indexOf("CP=")!=-1)?"y":"n";};if((_rf=="undefined")||(_rf=="")){_rf="bookmark"; }; _x2="
Also, the document was posted twice. I hope most readers here realized this before they read the entire document 2 times.
ut Microsoft.NET product manager Adam Sohn said the techniques used by Slemko are difficult to employ.
"These are very sophisticated exploits. This isn't just somebody downloading a script from a hacker site and running it," said Sohn, who reported the company has no evidence that anyone has taken advantage of the vulnerability.
With 2M wallets lying around, someone will put in the effort to create these "sophisticated" exploits. Indeed, someone already has...
I don't think users should have to do this at all. It should be done automatically by the kernel. The fact you have to do it at all is a problem.
All these details could be handled by the kernel seemlessly, if those attaining to promote desktop *n*x could come to understand that desktop users want to answer the least amount of questions possible.
The (Linux) kernel is already pretty advanced wrt the hardware it can detect and enable on the fly, along with loadable modules to activate hardware. These details are the least of concern for Joe 6-pak. I don't see anything wrong with implementing volume management similar to what AIX does and hiding the details from those who don't need/want them.
Give options to suppress that hand-holding for power users who request it, or buy a distro that says on the label "RH UltraXP: For Power Users."
If anyone's paying attention, it doesn't appear that M$ is losing market share by calling their customers "dumb-asses."
Anyone who's been using Slack for more than a couple years knows that it's a slow and methodical maintenance process, most of the time. The Linux kernel and security issues are kept at the most current levels, while fringe and development stuff are packaged (yes, the package manager is called pkgtool and it really is a package manager), for implementation only after careful review and testing. Recall the libc5 to libc6 transition.
This approach makes for reliable systems with high uptimes. Remember, only the squeaky wheel gets the oil. Things that don't make a lot of noise don't tend to get as much attention. My Slack boxes make very little noise; unless they hear a bunch of noise around them from other things like CR-infected non-*n*x machines.
"...I think this voice control thingy stems from this old, rather male, dream..."
Perhaps voice control does derive from that. As I mentioned in my post, not everyone can type more quickly (and, accurately) than they can speak. Some people speak very quickly. Very few people quickly key in accurate data. Surely, isn't new to you.
Typing is not a problem for me. But, when you find yourself yanking the keyboard from people so you can type in the commands you're trying to get them to type for you, you'll start looking more closely at the interfaces that don't appear to be working for the masses...
Interesting response, but I have to disagree with you that voice interaction shouldn't be considered a useful feature.
Two free hands are awesome when you're an artist. I'd rather my hands be at the ivories, all day, but our interfaces haven't evolved to that extent, yet.
"...it takes *a lot* of random attempts to do better than a human doing it analytically."
Which is why efforts at AI programming will continue to require human interaction for the foreseeable future. MIT has been at it over 40 years. Experience indicates that our programming interfaces haven't nearly evolved to the state of efficiency that we can interact with the machines in a natural enough way to make any significant progress. Many good programmers can't type. Some interface producers are giving us pseudo-intellegent controls that "learn" our preferences and traits (ex.: things that don't show up on menus if you haven't used them in 4 weeks, unless you expressly expand the list). The interfaces appear to be dummying down the human intelligence, which strikes me as antithetical to the task. Machine code is time-consuming. C/C++ also, but less so.
The interface needed has to be more LISP in nature, and a Voice interface is probably going to be needed before enough programming effort can be applied.
I'd certainly love to see the voice interaction tools start to evolve to a point of usefulness.
Wrong answer. You graciously respond to these types of issues by writing standards-compliant code; processing dynamic HTML at the server, and allowing everyone with any computer running any browser (even text) to access the site as fully as that browser is able to render.
Why fight the "Your browser isn't good enough so join us, or you're not allowed in our clubhouse" message with a similarly alienating message?
Slashdot Mirror
I have 13 PCs, all running Linux/UNIX, except 1 Windoze machine for MIDI. I don't own a DVD.
My sister is an art student with a mac. My cousin is a lawyer with a Toshiba laptop; both have DVD's. The cousin has a standalone DVD recorder/player plugged into her TV.
I'm pretty sure neither of them use their devices for X-Files or Star Trek. It's Sex in the City and Sopranos.
The reason the "Industry" is getting perturbed is not because a couple (trust me, we're quite the minority; if you don't believe me go work a help desk at an ISP for a month) nerds want Voyager. It's because my cousin wants Sex in the City.
Cry for them....
"I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed," bin Laden said as the U.S. war on terrorism raged in Afghanistan.
An interesting comment from someone most Americans appear to think doesn't understand our value of freedom. Perhaps we should guess again...
Usenet is loaded with the past errs also...
Same problems here on an AMDK6-3 on ActiveServer. PIII fixed that. My Athlon has never crashed without my help:
wtmp begins Mon Feb 14 17:48:19 2000
01:05.0 VGA compatible controller: 3Dfx Interactive, Inc. Voodoo 3 (rev 01) (prog-if 00 [VGA])
Subsystem: 3Dfx Interactive, Inc. Voodoo3 AGP
There are quite a few posts of the form: make xconfig && make dep && make clean && make bzImage && make modules && modules_install && reboot
Depending on your hardware that's a 5 - 30 minute process. Most of the time spent on kernel configuration is in make menuconfig (xconfig -or- config). This is where you make decisions on what drivers/features you will need/include. Keep in mind that the above won't always boot the machine if one of the decisions is made incorrectly.
When a distro is first installed, it always has a working hardware footprint by definition. Running through the options/features that are working for the install process to create a
Model XL300 I picked up for $300 and about $200 in parts. Was running 2.4.2 on Slackware 7.x fine for about 7 months until trying to upgrade the kernel. Tried 2.4.10 - 2.4.17 and none of them would even build. There's some discussion about CONFIG_HOTPLUG on 2.4.16. Although this issue deals with 2.2.20 the asm/pci.h hack was necessary to get 2.4.9 to build. But, that one wouldn't boot...
I finally found the 2.4.9-ac1 (an Alan Cox) kernel builds and appears stable. This isn't a complaint, but there were some concerning points made in discussions about kernel branches in researching how to get this kernel in place; one in particular a couple weeks on Slashdot.
Again, this is not a complaint: the XL300 was originally targeted for the NT 4.0 market. Guess what....
Linux tempe 2.4.9-ac1 #1 Tue Jan 15 11:04:17 MST 2002 alpha unknown
"I'm an artist who likes to make his own animation/video..."
As an artist I applaud that goal. However the results may end up looking something like this:
I hear the Macs have been quite good at AV content development for quite a few years; standards aside.
You should definitely sit down and document the procedure you used to set your friend's box up, and post it somewhere. Perhaps the Linux Desktop for Newbies HOWTO.
Some additional things to consider in this is the changing of DNS and other network settings over time that might cause problems for the end-user, since they don't know how to fix it, or can't give root to someone who can. Of course, if they did find someone who could, absence of root passwd isn't really a problem, anyway.
It's not so much a question of whether Joe Public can understand (while he/she probably cannot), but of whether he should have to invest the time in giving legal recourse to a service provider. Qwest should require a signature on the document from each customer to secure legal absolution from sharing data. If every one of your service providers did this, you'd spend your whole life reading contracts....
Unless of course you happen to be looking for a kernel stable enough to run a milo-based Alpha, or something. Kernels in Linus' tree won't compile after 2.4.3; in Alan's tree after 2.4.9-ac1 they compile but don't boot my XL300. Granted it's pretty arcane hardware, but it still works and I want to use it for something. Wasting countless hours on deciding which and attempting to compile/boot umpteen kernels is not a good use of time. There's already production/development; Alan/Linus, and several other kernel tress. It's important that one of them remains stable and solid code.
You must be hanging out in the lost 5% of the Internet with the rest of us.
While primarily about music and songwriting, there's a lot of pro-linux content. There appear to be some trends from 1998 to 2001:
1998
os Cnt
Win95 8199 92.33%
WinXX 514 5.79%
WinNT 67 0.75%
Win98 47 0.53%
Mac 35 0.39%
Linux 18 0.20%
1999
os Cnt
Win95 49854 89.15%
Win98 2852 5.10%
WinNT 1626 2.91%
WinXX 788 1.41%
Linux 398 0.71%
Mac 384 0.69%
UNIX 19 0.03%
2000
os Cnt
WinNT 22820 32.14%
Win95 18958 26.70%
Win98 16534 23.29%
Linux 6021 8.48%
WinXX 5578 7.86%
Mac 707 1.00%
UNIX 375 0.53%
2001
os Cnt
WinNT 20670 37.18%
Win98 17176 30.90%
Win95 9477 17.05%
Linux 5405 9.72%
WinXX 2020 3.63%
Mac 786 1.41%
UNIX 60 0.11%
Pardoning me Shaek Mohammad Mohamed Banky, but did you not mean "Praise Allah?"
How can anyone keep up with Micro$oft? Answer is they can't until the Gov't enforces the law.
Until someone on the Government's side puts a foot down on M$'s ranglings the industry will stay stagnant, people will only code for M$ technologies and 50% of the revenue produced by software development will continue to go to Redmond for licensing fees. Innovative software that's useful will continue to not exist. I'd pay for Cakewalk or ProTools for Linux, but no one's going to develop that software when no one will buy it unless it's written for Windoze.
Not using WinXP might not cut it, but it's certainly a step in the right direction...
giving the boys acid and letting them jump out of windows...
then landed into the CIA and came up with this cool surveillance idea that involved cats....
Or, you could read the article first and realize Linus' remark was in response to a question about
I ran into a guy last night at Staples who said he's using Debian for his desktop.
There are probably a similar number of Linux/BSD desktop users out there as there are Mac desktop users...........
Whatever you may think about Linus, he certainly remains pretty noncommittal about the future of Linux, and that has to make some PHBs somewhat uncomfortable. I wouldn't be suprized to see someone put some spin on:
"If I were to make a prediction right now, which I?m not going to, if that prediction actually came true, I?d be really disappointed."
indicating a lack of direction. But, with mention of IBM and the way the license has been set up, he almost seems willing to pass on the torch.
"People are doing things with Linux that I?m frankly not that interested in, and that?s fine."
Who's editing content for Cisco? At the time I hit the link this was displayed at the bottom:
if (_sv==10){if (document.cookie.indexOf("CP=")!=-1){_ce="y";}els
Also, the document was posted twice. I hope most readers here realized this before they read the entire document 2 times.
ut Microsoft
"These are very sophisticated exploits. This isn't just somebody downloading a script from a hacker site and running it," said Sohn, who reported the company has no evidence that anyone has taken advantage of the vulnerability.
With 2M wallets lying around, someone will put in the effort to create these "sophisticated" exploits. Indeed, someone already has...
* Where do I mount and unmount things ?
I don't think users should have to do this at all. It should be done automatically by the kernel. The fact you have to do it at all is a problem.
All these details could be handled by the kernel seemlessly, if those attaining to promote desktop *n*x could come to understand that desktop users want to answer the least amount of questions possible.
The (Linux) kernel is already pretty advanced wrt the hardware it can detect and enable on the fly, along with loadable modules to activate hardware. These details are the least of concern for Joe 6-pak. I don't see anything wrong with implementing volume management similar to what AIX does and hiding the details from those who don't need/want them.
Give options to suppress that hand-holding for power users who request it, or buy a distro that says on the label "RH UltraXP: For Power Users."
If anyone's paying attention, it doesn't appear that M$ is losing market share by calling their customers "dumb-asses."
Anyone who's been using Slack for more than a couple years knows that it's a slow and methodical maintenance process, most of the time. The Linux kernel and security issues are kept at the most current levels, while fringe and development stuff are packaged (yes, the package manager is called pkgtool and it really is a package manager), for implementation only after careful review and testing. Recall the libc5 to libc6 transition.
This approach makes for reliable systems with high uptimes. Remember, only the squeaky wheel gets the oil. Things that don't make a lot of noise don't tend to get as much attention. My Slack boxes make very little noise; unless they hear a bunch of noise around them from other things like CR-infected non-*n*x machines.
"...I think this voice control thingy stems from this old, rather male, dream..."
Perhaps voice control does derive from that. As I mentioned in my post, not everyone can type more quickly (and, accurately) than they can speak. Some people speak very quickly. Very few people quickly key in accurate data. Surely, isn't new to you.
Typing is not a problem for me. But, when you find yourself yanking the keyboard from people so you can type in the commands you're trying to get them to type for you, you'll start looking more closely at the interfaces that don't appear to be working for the masses...
Interesting response, but I have to disagree with you that voice interaction shouldn't be considered a useful feature.
Two free hands are awesome when you're an artist. I'd rather my hands be at the ivories, all day, but our interfaces haven't evolved to that extent, yet.
That's just too strange to be an American joke...
Still pretty damn, funny tho'.
"...it takes *a lot* of random attempts to do better than a human doing it analytically."
Which is why efforts at AI programming will continue to require human interaction for the foreseeable future. MIT has been at it over 40 years. Experience indicates that our programming interfaces haven't nearly evolved to the state of efficiency that we can interact with the machines in a natural enough way to make any significant progress. Many good programmers can't type. Some interface producers are giving us pseudo-intellegent controls that "learn" our preferences and traits (ex.: things that don't show up on menus if you haven't used them in 4 weeks, unless you expressly expand the list). The interfaces appear to be dummying down the human intelligence, which strikes me as antithetical to the task. Machine code is time-consuming. C/C++ also, but less so.
The interface needed has to be more LISP in nature, and a Voice interface is probably going to be needed before enough programming effort can be applied.
I'd certainly love to see the voice interaction tools start to evolve to a point of usefulness.
Wrong answer. You graciously respond to these types of issues by writing standards-compliant code; processing dynamic HTML at the server, and allowing everyone with any computer running any browser (even text) to access the site as fully as that browser is able to render.
Why fight the "Your browser isn't good enough so join us, or you're not allowed in our clubhouse" message with a similarly alienating message?