But what still continues to boggle me is the following paradox: if people are so critical about Linux (and it's their right, Linux is not perfect), how can they be so tolerant of the current Windows flaws (cf. my GP post) ?
Because people don't like change. Better the devil you know, etc. Change is inherently evil, apparently, as is Linux. Unlike the Microsoft FUD machine, which is inherently kind, warning people from the evil geeks trying to take over the world.
Once a flaw has been accepted as part of everyday life, the user is conditioned into ignoring it. A different (or even the same) flaw in an unknown system is not ignorable, which is why Linux needs to be practically perfect in every way before 'normal' people make the switch en masse.
The more I think about it, the further away that seems. But I acknowledge that things are getting better.
Currently installing 6.06 on my old box (safety first). Beautiful installation! The test is with the other two (newer) boxes...including the laptop...
I'd say my experiencing with installing is 50/50; maybe more in Linux now, as I've tried out 10 or so distros on 3 boxes.
The fact that years of Windows experience counts for nothing is exactly the issue the Linux community needs to react to. Linux ought to have a much greater share than it does based on capabilities, but it doesn't for that reason. Won't apply to my two kids - all they've known is Linux (the eldest (3) has a Tux poster on his wall at his request!)
There's been plenty of occasions when something has worked well in Linux, but not in Windows (wireless keyboard & mouse). I have to say I've had more hardware trouble in Linux than Windows overall - understandable, as the manufacturer's write Windows drivers first. Also, little things (like disk mounting etc., more GUIs) could be made easier for a newbie...if these issues are addressed, then making the switch will be less scary for a seasoned Windows user.
Believe me, I'd like nothing more than for Linux to wipe the floor with Windows. The foundations are in place, but it's still a long way away.
Whoooah!
I agree in principle, but my non-geek friends don't: my experience with Ubuntu has been great overall on 2 laptops and 1 desktop. I'm a ~100% Linux user, except when my new laptop doesn't work and I have 3 days to get my presentation ready;-)...but Ubuntu is still a long way from polishing off those two issues, so that an average Desktop user doesn't have to use CUI (they don't like it) to mend something. There have been examples I have with each box that fit into the driver categories:
nvidia cards - they're quite common, aren't they?
wireless cards
bluetooth mice (needs CUI & editing configuration files, in my experience)
mounting disks isn't desktop-user-friendly (NTFS writing? + my USB pen & CD-RW disks frequently mount as read-only; the update script for my mp3 player only works if I plug into a specific USB slot, but not the others)
I've not known trouble with windows for these. It's not Linux at fault, but it is an inhibitory step towards switching for an average desktop user. And there is a long way to go.
Please don't use the "you're only 10% of the userbase" argument. It really upsets a lot of Firefox & Linux users (myself included).;-)
There's enough Windows-bashing on slashdot as it is. But I prefer to focus on improving things in Linux than FUD-ing Windows.
The remaining issues can basically all be regrouped under 2 banners: "lack of open source drivers" or "lack of proprietary software XYZ under Linux". Those 2 things are VERY important...
I have to say that this statement sums it up (and loses the argument for you!). There is a long way to go before these two issues are sorted. Nvidia cards are very common today; the Ubuntu install doesn't sort this out. Other hardware can be very tricky too (e.g. wireless cards). Searching for replacements for proprietary software can also be tricky (and frequently end up using 3-4 pieces of software (or learning some CUI stuff) to replace 1 piece of Windows software).
I'm not a 'common user', but I'm not a programmer... it took me 3 weeks of posting to forums (fora?) to get my sound card and video card working; and a further week to get the laptop to connect to a projector for presentations etc. The laptop installed Windows XP in 2 hours and worked perfectly first time, first day. I've already done all my searches for replacements for proprietary software, but it took a long time.
The desktop user facing this situation is not likely to have the faith and patience to switch to Linux, unless they have a very generous and patient geek friend.
I switched from KDE to Gnome for the simple reason that Gnome provided more of what I wanted: chiefly, I find adding buttons to the panel is easier in Gnome; and the "updates are available" button in Gnome is brilliant.
I also find browsing files quicker (Nautilus opens up much quicker than Konquerer).
I'd like to see KDE developers take some lessons from Gnome: if they provide the things that Gnome is better at currently, I'll switch back. Until then, I'm a happy Gnome.
Your're right. These mice had their genes altered before birth, although the genes can be altered so that they are not activated or deactivated until after birth.
With gene therapy, this could be used for soldiers, I guess. This is kind of changing genes on the fly. The other possibility is to produce a drug to knock down this gene or its pathway. Soldiers could then be given that drug before battle.
Scary thought (for their enemies, at least).
It wasn't love at first sight, I have to say, but a realisation of advantages one-by-one. My reasons are 9-fold. Been trying to think of a 10th, but to no avail.
1. Stability. I got sick of Windows requiring a reinstall (plus reinstalling all the 3rd party software from various CDs & downloads)
2. Convenience. I've settled on Ubuntu because of this one...repositories/software installation. Brilliant.
3. Security & cpu. It works faster - perhaps because I don't require Norton + Spysweeper running.
4. Maintenance. Uninstall, reinstall. Repartition; etc.
5. Support. WOW! Any problem, and someone on a forum will help (and, if you're reading - thanks guys!!). If I need to use command line, it's easy, coz someone tells me what to copy & paste in!
6. Ease. Everything works (I don't do gaming). If a distro didn't work for me then I just tried another one. Fun doing that, too. When it doesn't work, see reason 5!
7. Choice. Gnome/KDE; Firefox/Konquerer; etc. etc. And all do what I want them to do.
8. Fun! I can play with it and know that I'm not likely to break it beyond repair.
9. Cost. Last on the list, but a massive advantage. FOSS on Windows is getting very good, too, but Linux is unbeatable on that front.
On the other hand, I can't scrap Windows completely just yet - but I won't be buying Vista. The problems include hardware & software...My printer (Canon pixma iP4000) isn't supported on Linux; I'll get round to a forum - hopefully someone will help. Also, some software I have can't be run on Linux and has no complete replacements yet (e.g. online Bible).
Not really... Serum cytokines simply means that's where they measured them. They aren't necessarily specific to the blood: the cells that release them are equally capable of releasing them in tissue. These cytokines appear to be released from damaged nerve tissue.
The significance of them being in the serum is that they are circulating and are able to have systemic effects rather than just local (e.g tissue) effects.
They don't list the cytokines becuase the publication is a news site for medics. If the work is good enough, it'll be published in a respectable journal somewhere with details of cytokines and levels. You won't have to wait for the human study. Most rodent cytokines have a human equivalent and vice versa (with some notable exceptions (IL-8 for one)). The human study will just be ensuring that this effect does cross over.
It isn't unusual to see cytokine release from stressed or damaged tissue. It is unusual to see physosocial effects. The key observation is that some behaviour, thought to be plain laziness or 'mental' problems, may actually be explained by more basic physiological explanations.
I know I'm late to this (Saturday in the UK...why should I be up?)......I can't see any comments on speed of Linspire compared to others...all this eye candy stuff sounds expensive on processor power...
I have a slow laptop that copes (just; most of the time) with Ubuntu...is Linspire even slower?
...and it's only the longest (or 2nd...) name because someone actually wrote it down. It's a protein, made of amino acids, comprised of covalently-bound atoms. Big deal. The amino-acid sequence (usually represented by single letter or 3-letter abbreviations) is sufficient and meaningful.
There are stretches of DNA that are far bigger than that (e.g. chromosomes). But noone bothers writing down the chemical formula for any of them, because listing the sequence of bases is sufficient.
I agree with previous posters - this isn't news. It's not even that interesting (and, yes, I appreciate the irony that I'm posting to it).
Maybe so, but the analogy isn't quite right, IMHO...
Doctors who operate on you in dirty hospitals aren't necessarily held accountable when you get MRSA.
The anti-Microsoft sentiment (and I agree with most of it) has at least produced some action from them recently; this being an example.
They're on my evil-list for anti-competetive behaviour and cynical FUD campaigns. But for this effort I applaud them.
Slashdot Mirror
I hadn't spotted that: I was too busy fuming over the "where as popular" error.
But what still continues to boggle me is the following paradox: if people are so critical about Linux (and it's their right, Linux is not perfect), how can they be so tolerant of the current Windows flaws (cf. my GP post) ?
Because people don't like change. Better the devil you know, etc. Change is inherently evil, apparently, as is Linux. Unlike the Microsoft FUD machine, which is inherently kind, warning people from the evil geeks trying to take over the world.
Once a flaw has been accepted as part of everyday life, the user is conditioned into ignoring it. A different (or even the same) flaw in an unknown system is not ignorable, which is why Linux needs to be practically perfect in every way before 'normal' people make the switch en masse.
The more I think about it, the further away that seems. But I acknowledge that things are getting better.
Currently installing 6.06 on my old box (safety first). Beautiful installation! The test is with the other two (newer) boxes...including the laptop...
I'd say my experiencing with installing is 50/50; maybe more in Linux now, as I've tried out 10 or so distros on 3 boxes. The fact that years of Windows experience counts for nothing is exactly the issue the Linux community needs to react to. Linux ought to have a much greater share than it does based on capabilities, but it doesn't for that reason. Won't apply to my two kids - all they've known is Linux (the eldest (3) has a Tux poster on his wall at his request!) There's been plenty of occasions when something has worked well in Linux, but not in Windows (wireless keyboard & mouse). I have to say I've had more hardware trouble in Linux than Windows overall - understandable, as the manufacturer's write Windows drivers first. Also, little things (like disk mounting etc., more GUIs) could be made easier for a newbie...if these issues are addressed, then making the switch will be less scary for a seasoned Windows user. Believe me, I'd like nothing more than for Linux to wipe the floor with Windows. The foundations are in place, but it's still a long way away.
Whoooah! I agree in principle, but my non-geek friends don't: my experience with Ubuntu has been great overall on 2 laptops and 1 desktop. I'm a ~100% Linux user, except when my new laptop doesn't work and I have 3 days to get my presentation ready ;-) ...but Ubuntu is still a long way from polishing off those two issues, so that an average Desktop user doesn't have to use CUI (they don't like it) to mend something. There have been examples I have with each box that fit into the driver categories:
nvidia cards - they're quite common, aren't they?
wireless cards
bluetooth mice (needs CUI & editing configuration files, in my experience)
mounting disks isn't desktop-user-friendly (NTFS writing? + my USB pen & CD-RW disks frequently mount as read-only; the update script for my mp3 player only works if I plug into a specific USB slot, but not the others)
I've not known trouble with windows for these. It's not Linux at fault, but it is an inhibitory step towards switching for an average desktop user. And there is a long way to go.
Please don't use the "you're only 10% of the userbase" argument. It really upsets a lot of Firefox & Linux users (myself included). ;-)
There's enough Windows-bashing on slashdot as it is. But I prefer to focus on improving things in Linux than FUD-ing Windows.
The remaining issues can basically all be regrouped under 2 banners: "lack of open source drivers" or "lack of proprietary software XYZ under Linux". Those 2 things are VERY important...
I have to say that this statement sums it up (and loses the argument for you!). There is a long way to go before these two issues are sorted. Nvidia cards are very common today; the Ubuntu install doesn't sort this out. Other hardware can be very tricky too (e.g. wireless cards). Searching for replacements for proprietary software can also be tricky (and frequently end up using 3-4 pieces of software (or learning some CUI stuff) to replace 1 piece of Windows software).
I'm not a 'common user', but I'm not a programmer...
it took me 3 weeks of posting to forums (fora?) to get my sound card and video card working; and a further week to get the laptop to connect to a projector for presentations etc. The laptop installed Windows XP in 2 hours and worked perfectly first time, first day.
I've already done all my searches for replacements for proprietary software, but it took a long time.
The desktop user facing this situation is not likely to have the faith and patience to switch to Linux, unless they have a very generous and patient geek friend.
I switched from KDE to Gnome for the simple reason that Gnome provided more of what I wanted: chiefly, I find adding buttons to the panel is easier in Gnome; and the "updates are available" button in Gnome is brilliant. I also find browsing files quicker (Nautilus opens up much quicker than Konquerer).
I'd like to see KDE developers take some lessons from Gnome: if they provide the things that Gnome is better at currently, I'll switch back. Until then, I'm a happy Gnome.
Is dwr any better?
This mouse will be useful for those of us who have screensavers. I currently have nothing that will log out of my screensaver to alert me of email/IM.
Your're right. These mice had their genes altered before birth, although the genes can be altered so that they are not activated or deactivated until after birth. With gene therapy, this could be used for soldiers, I guess. This is kind of changing genes on the fly. The other possibility is to produce a drug to knock down this gene or its pathway. Soldiers could then be given that drug before battle. Scary thought (for their enemies, at least).
It wasn't love at first sight, I have to say, but a realisation of advantages one-by-one. My reasons are 9-fold. Been trying to think of a 10th, but to no avail. 1. Stability. I got sick of Windows requiring a reinstall (plus reinstalling all the 3rd party software from various CDs & downloads) 2. Convenience. I've settled on Ubuntu because of this one...repositories/software installation. Brilliant. 3. Security & cpu. It works faster - perhaps because I don't require Norton + Spysweeper running. 4. Maintenance. Uninstall, reinstall. Repartition; etc. 5. Support. WOW! Any problem, and someone on a forum will help (and, if you're reading - thanks guys!!). If I need to use command line, it's easy, coz someone tells me what to copy & paste in! 6. Ease. Everything works (I don't do gaming). If a distro didn't work for me then I just tried another one. Fun doing that, too. When it doesn't work, see reason 5! 7. Choice. Gnome/KDE; Firefox/Konquerer; etc. etc. And all do what I want them to do. 8. Fun! I can play with it and know that I'm not likely to break it beyond repair. 9. Cost. Last on the list, but a massive advantage. FOSS on Windows is getting very good, too, but Linux is unbeatable on that front. On the other hand, I can't scrap Windows completely just yet - but I won't be buying Vista. The problems include hardware & software...My printer (Canon pixma iP4000) isn't supported on Linux; I'll get round to a forum - hopefully someone will help. Also, some software I have can't be run on Linux and has no complete replacements yet (e.g. online Bible).
Not really... Serum cytokines simply means that's where they measured them. They aren't necessarily specific to the blood: the cells that release them are equally capable of releasing them in tissue. These cytokines appear to be released from damaged nerve tissue.
The significance of them being in the serum is that they are circulating and are able to have systemic effects rather than just local (e.g tissue) effects.
They don't list the cytokines becuase the publication is a news site for medics. If the work is good enough, it'll be published in a respectable journal somewhere with details of cytokines and levels. You won't have to wait for the human study. Most rodent cytokines have a human equivalent and vice versa (with some notable exceptions (IL-8 for one)). The human study will just be ensuring that this effect does cross over.
It isn't unusual to see cytokine release from stressed or damaged tissue. It is unusual to see physosocial effects. The key observation is that some behaviour, thought to be plain laziness or 'mental' problems, may actually be explained by more basic physiological explanations.
I know I'm late to this (Saturday in the UK...why should I be up?)... ...I can't see any comments on speed of Linspire compared to others...all this eye candy stuff sounds expensive on processor power...
I have a slow laptop that copes (just; most of the time) with Ubuntu...is Linspire even slower?
What is your vision for the future of Linux, and what legacy will you leave as your part in that future?
...and it's only the longest (or 2nd...) name because someone actually wrote it down. It's a protein, made of amino acids, comprised of covalently-bound atoms. Big deal. The amino-acid sequence (usually represented by single letter or 3-letter abbreviations) is sufficient and meaningful.
There are stretches of DNA that are far bigger than that (e.g. chromosomes). But noone bothers writing down the chemical formula for any of them, because listing the sequence of bases is sufficient.
I agree with previous posters - this isn't news. It's not even that interesting (and, yes, I appreciate the irony that I'm posting to it).
Maybe so, but the analogy isn't quite right, IMHO... Doctors who operate on you in dirty hospitals aren't necessarily held accountable when you get MRSA. The anti-Microsoft sentiment (and I agree with most of it) has at least produced some action from them recently; this being an example. They're on my evil-list for anti-competetive behaviour and cynical FUD campaigns. But for this effort I applaud them.