For your global shortcuts, at least, you can always just use xbindkeys. A very powerful global shortcuts daemon. It's completely independent of the window manager and should be in the repositories of most distros. It gets really interesting when you combine it with the xmacro GUI scripting program to do things that aren't CLI scriptable such as certain types of interactions with virtual machines. For example, I like to hit a hotkey in Linux and certain things automatically happen in a virtual machine I'm running. That's not something I've been able to script with bash. However, xmacro has no trouble taking over the mouse and keyboard briefly, running into the virtual machine, doing what I've set it up to do and then quickly handing back control to me. It makes some normally repetitive and tedious tasks quite fast and easy.
Re:Can't figure out the address bar?
on
Google Zeitgeist 2008
·
· Score: 5, Informative
When the mistake drops down, highlight it and press shift+delete.
Unfortunately, you'd get all the adults who don't pay income taxes clamoring for their "fair share" and they'd get it. Just like what happened with the stimulus package. That's not a tax break when you give tax money to people who don't pay taxes. It's theft.
And when this country gets to the point to where more than 50 percent of the voting population isn't paying in, what's to stop them from voting in politicians who will give them everything?
While I understand what you are thinking, here is what's really going on. When Ubuntu was loaded on this thing, actual programs were chewing up that 100 MB I was talking about. And since, it had 192 MB of RAM, there were 92-ish left over for caching. Which, of course, Ubuntu was using. When I would start Firefox, and open a few tabs, the computer would reclaim all of that cache and more thus the swapping.
With Arch installed, according to free, there are 17 MB being used by actual programs at the desktop with no extra programs being started by me. The other 175 are, of course, being used for cache. With Firefox going, 51 MB of RAM would be used. The rest being available, and being used, for cache. I get how this cache thing works. I understand that you want as much in cache as possible. I'm not using DOS. These are modern operating systems and that's how they work. I'm not saying "ZOMGWTF WHERE'S MAh RAMS!"
Here is the crux of the matter. All things being equal, you still want the lightest footprint OS as it leaves more left over for cache. Case in point, Arch loads programs faster than Ubuntu on my machine. A lot of that has to do with the fact that there is more RAM left over for it to cache to. As far as Vista and XP are concerned, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the caching system/algorithm in Vista is better than the one for XP so although Vista itself may use up 400MB, leaving the other 612 MB in a 1 Gig system for caching, it still starts programs better than what you would get from the 900 MB that would be left over on the same system after a base install of XP. Of course, this leads us to one of the crucial differences between open and closed source OS's. Wouldn't it be great to just use the Vista caching system in XP? You could have the speed advantage of XP with the latency advantage of Vista. Only problem is, nobody except Microsoft is privy to the underlying code necessary to make backporting non-trivial Vista features to XP possible. With FOSS, this isn't the case. I can install a lightweigh fast distro like Arch and still use the latest latency reducing features like preload, for example, of any other version of Linux.
I would prescribe a healthy dose of Arch Linux for this problem you're having. I have an old Toshiba laptop laying around here that I had given up for dead. 600MHz Celeron, 192MB RAM, 12GB HDD. It came with Windows 2000 and was tolerable, I suppose. Only problem is, I don't know anything about Windows and none of my command line-fu worked on it so, off it went. I tried Ubuntu first which was horrible. Even with a lightweight window manager like IceWM and most of the unneeded services like bluetooth, etc. turned off, it bumped against 100 MB RAM doing nothing. Load Firefox with a couple of tabs (don't care for Opera and Konqueror needs more extensions to be useful for me), and it was over. Swap city. So, to get to the point, I tried Gentoo, and after waiting 7 hours for KDE to compile and then ending up with an error, I then wiped it in disgust.
Enter Arch Linux. Installed to a CLI in about 10 minutes. Getting the wi-fi working from the cli with wpa_supplicant and the zd1211 firmware for my card was a breeze. Then I proceeded to download and install xorg and icewm. All told, at a cli with wi-fi working it idles at eleven MB. Logged in to icewm it sits at 17. And with firefox running, a grand total of 51 Megabytes. And of course, it's blazing. With Firefox 2, it's at least as fast as my Pentium 4 laptop running Debian with Firefox 3. And, of course everything works in Firefox. Flash 10, etc.
Although what I've said doesn't speak completely to your point, suffice it to say, depending on your setup, you aren't doomed to a slower computer when running reasonably up to date software.
An interesting thing happened while I was visiting my girlfriend's work last night. She's a project coordinator at a call center here in Atlanta that handles tech support for hotel guests' wi-fi connections. I happened to be loitering by one woman's cubicle as she was taking a call. The word "Xandros" uttered by her immediately got my attention. I quickly concluded that someone had an Eee PC and was trying to get it connected. Now, ordinarily, you would think, a call center would just say something like, "We don't support the Linux." and hang up but she gave it a go. She went through her menus on her tech support screen to pull up the right script and as I was watching, lo and behold, a screenshot of Fedora came up with some text talking about opening the terminal and using ifconfig, etc. So, she asks the guy to open the terminal. Then my heart sunk. I realized that Xandros on the Eee PC hides the terminal by default. The person she was talking to was a newb so he wouldn't be able to figure out, just open the file manager and navigate to/usr/bin to find xterm or whatever. (My way after 2 minutes in Best Buy playing with an Eee, I'm sure there are better ones.) And of course the call just went downhill from there. As badly as I wanted to, I couldn't say a word. When I couldn't take anymore, I just walked away.
The takeaway is, as you have intimated, why do we need so many different distro's with so many ways of doing things? If Asus had just left well enough alone and hadn't tried to hide things like the terminal, that customer might have gotten his wifi working and been happy. Now, they are probably asking themselves, why they bought this non-functional Linux crap when they could have just gotten good old Windows instead. That's just a real world concrete example of the consequences of reinventing a perfectly functional wheel and alienating new Linux users.
Hi, for a virtual keyboard, I use xvkbd. It works great and is in the repositories for just about every distribution. The great thing about it and what, in my opinion, makes it even better than what you get with the Windows tablet edition and most of the other commercial soft virtual keyboards, is it is freely resizeable so if you have fat fingers, you just make it as big as necessary, otherwise, keep it small and once you set the size, it stays that way everytime you bring it up. It looks almost just like a real keyboard with all the keys right there. It doesn't automatically pop up when you touch a text field like the address bar in your browser for example but, I haven't really tried to make it do that. I have a shortcut icon for it on my taskbar linked to a script that toggles it on and off. When I need it, i just touch the icon; when I'm done, I touch the icon again and it's gone. When it appears, it is set to stay on top so it won't get hidden by other windows.
As far as multi-touch, that's obviously something that has to be implemented in hardware first and this monitor, which is several years old, by the way, just doesn't have it. So, even if Linux had it, I wouldn't be able to use it. I did take the liberty of Googling multi-touch and linux and it is on the table, so to speak so support is coming. You'll just have to have a touchscreen that works that way.
It will never work no matter what. Say you have a Wii and it breaks and you buy a new one to do the swap/return trick. Oh crap, there is a serial number/rfid chip/ipv6 chip embedded in the chassis. Anyone with a little mechanical aptitude and a set of screwdrivers can just disassemble the chassis and swap the internal components. This will make it even easier to pull it off. The clerk scans for the chip and it's there. I mean, it must be the same item right? Same goes for anything that has a case like a router, laptop, whatever. Obviously, this won't work as well for video cards but, there is always a way.
For warranty issues, hell, a hair dryer gets hot enough to soften the glue that holds the little "void warranty" stickers they put over that one screw hole. Just heat it up, pull it off, do what you are doing then put it right back on good as new.
I'm not sure what problem anyone else on here is having with their touch screens and Linux but the 7" touch screen Xenarc LCD attached to the PC in my car works perfectly with Ubuntu 8.04. The drivers and calibration software is an easy download from their site and a shell script away to install. I can't imagine it being easier or working better on Windows.
Of course, I am a bit selective in the hardware I buy. I love using Linux on my computers and wouldn't use anything else so I am willing to do the little bit of research necessary to purchase hardware that works with it as opposed to getting whatever is the cheapest on newegg and hoping that I won't have any problems.
Everything the owners of N8xx's wish they were but aren't. Particularly the USB host support in addition to the half-assed USB on-the-go crap. 600MHz ARM overclockable to 900, 3D graphics hardware that you can actually use. You can easily install a real version of Linux and not be stuck with the Maemo cut-rate stuff like on the N-series. I know that's fixable but it isn't easy. Support for up to 64 GB worth of SDHC cards. S-video out, the list goes on and on. They have a video on the site of it running Xubuntu and Firefox 3 quite snappily. The only reason I'm sticking with my N770 for now is the Pandora looks a little bit bigger than pocketable.
Something that may help you in the future is if you can't remember the exact site of a software vendor and have to search for it, instead of using google, try wikipedia. It's a lot harder to get thrown off there than it is in a google search page with something like 36 different variations of avgsoftware.com or whatever with only one of those being the actual one you are looking for. With Wikipedia, in just about every article for a piece of software, there is a little box on the right hand side telling the current version, the vendor and a link to the vendor's site. Obviously not fool proof but it hasn't let me down yet and it at least increases your chances of going to the right place the first time.
Of course, I'm not completely up on my Windows fresh install software hunt lore as I happen to use a little program called synaptic to do my post install goody searching but to each his own.
the USB dongles look ugly sticking out of the side.
I always wonder at this when people bring it up. When I got my 3G modem from Verizon, I specifically got the USB720 USB dongle for the specific reason that it is what it is. An easy way to get any computer on the internet that has nothing more than a USB port to stick it in. I can't tell you how many times I've run different desktops and laptops with it while troubleshooting to get them on the net for drivers, software, etc. Most modern Linux distro's have drivers for it built right in. I believe OSX does too. Of course, Windows doesn't but, I just boot a live CD to work with those. In fact, my Intrepid CD is zero config. You just load it up on the Live CD, plug in the modem and click connect. You don't have to tell it/dev/usbtty0 or whatever it is, you don't have to type in #777 or anything, it just works. I have no interest in a built in 3G modem that can only be used on the particular hardware it came on. Just added expense in my (net)book.
Not attacking your basic thesis but, in the time honored tradition of slashdot car analogies, a slightly used Toyota Corolla would cost less than a bramd new Chevy Aveo and probably last a lot longer too but many people just have to have something that hasn't had any previous owner barring the factory and the distributor.
I'm also jealous. You got a smoking deal on that laptop.
As the less than thrilled owner of a Windows Mobile 5 pda phone (HTC Starcom), I couldn't agree more with your assessment. This thing is a complete piece of crap and the crappiness begins and ends with the OS.
It constantly locks up requiring a reset. And when I reset it, it's a crapshoot whether it will hang on the boot screen requiring me to remove and reinsert the battery. I constantly have to recalibrate the touch screen or my touch gets farther and farther off the mark. No command line. No USB host support though I guess that's more the fault of the device. Still sucks though. When I receive a call, it might ring, then again it might not. The UI is all-around slow. It's like you push a button and when it feels like it, it will respond, and this thing has a 400 MHz processor. I realize it's an ARM but still.
I could go on and on but suffice it to say, this thing sucks. I eschewed Windows on my desktop for Linux a long time ago and I wish so bad there were a legitimate Linux alternative for my phone. You have no idea how happy I would be to have a Linux based PDA phone. I looked at the Openmoko but, without 3G data, it doesn't make much sense. Though with USB host support, maybe I can use it with my USB720 modem. Any thoughts? One day. One more thing, the idea of WinCE on a netbook is a bad joke.
I would suggest http://anonymityanywhere.com/incognito/. LiveCD based on Gentoo Linux with a KDE desktop featuring TorK for anonymous browsing, instant messaging, torrenting (although running torrent traffic through the onion is a little weak). It has plenty of codecs for multimedia viewing, truecrypt pre-installed so you can just open your own truecrypt volumes. The LiveCD doesn't utilize the swap space already on your hard drive unlike others like Knoppix; I'm not sure about Ubuntu. And for its final coup de grace, when you shutdown the LiveCD, it automatically wipes your RAM to avoid the freeze spray (whatever it's called) attack.
Highly recommended. I haven't found anything better.
I can't speak for anyone else but the reasons I went with and remain with Ubuntu are pretty simple. I wanted to use Debian because of their stance on freedom and open source but a. the learning curve was a bit steep for a newb and b. etch was a bit out-dated. I tried Knoppix but for some strange reason, various bits of my hardware didn't work. I was turned off of Mandriva because of my experiences with RedHat and RPM's way back in the day when I first dabbled in Linux.
I had heard nothing but good things about apt-get and dpkg so the next distro out of the pile for me to try was Ubuntu. And the rest has been history. It worked perfectly out of the box first time. Not cheesy like Linspire or PCLinuxOS and not too hard either. I think it's what you could call the Goldilocks distro. Not too tough but not condescending either. Whatever IT is, Ubuntu has it and its popularity attests to that.
Linux users are hilarious, because they have a laundry list of things which Windows "can't do"... meaning it's a huge list of things Windows CAN do but they don't know how, and don't care to figure out.
That's really great. So you're telling me, Windows can do everything Linux can, I just don't know how. Okay, cool. Please explain to me how I can install Windows NT[4-6]on my Linksys router. I see. And, oh, which version of Windows comes with every driver including the built in webcam on my laptop working out of the box? Oh. Okay, how about which Windows can I click add/remove programs, browse through an online repository of thousands of free fully functional programs and download and start using whatever I want with just the click of a button? Yeah. And, furthermore, which version of Windows can both update itself and every single one of my programs with security patches, enhanced functionality, newer versions, etc. with the mere click of a button and a typed password? I thought not. And, admittedly though it's not for everyone, which version of Vista should I pay my hard earned money to so I can have spinning cubes on my desktop?
My point? I'll make a fresh one just for you. Cause I like you. Your anecdote is atypical for Windows. My anecdote is typical for Debian. IOW, you got lucky. I was just enjoying the same stability and trouble freeness that almost all other competent server administrators enjoy.
XP is also not aimed at a market that installs/uninstalls software on a daily basis.
Funny you say that. Everytime I boot a computer on a Windows installation disk, it refuses to recognize any other file system other than NTFS of FAT. It also does not give me any option or warning when installing it that it is wiping my MBR thus rendering all other non-windows operating systems on my computer unbootable until I go in and fix it by hand. Something most users are not going to be able to do. Contrary to what you say, it seems like they think their OS is for everybody and no other system is necessary or even exists.
The only thing self-explanatory about that is how linux users have their own language, further reinforcing how much an investment of time it is to learn to use it.
Possibly true. However, learning the linux user language is entirely unnecessary in this regard. If updates are available, a little icon pops up on your toolbar that goes something along the lines of "Click me to update". Surely non linux linguists can parse that. I merely pointed out the former method as candy for the audience I am speaking to here on Slashdot.
I haven't heard a first-hand account of any XP user I know suffering any significant inconvenience from a virus having installed free anti-virus software (Avast).
No doubt. Good thing all those XP users are running quality free anti-virus tools like Avast right? Right? Point being that many windows users in fact do not use any form of anti-virus app at all. I guess that's their fault. Hey, keeps all the mom and pop computer shop service departments open, yes? I can't speak too loudly, I don't run anti-virus either. Oh, wait...
How long did it take you to learn to install linux? Are you willing to spend that time over and over teaching XP users how to install linux? The primary advantage of XP is how widespread the knowledge base is. Linux information is widely accessible too, but not necessarily from someone across the street. I consider learning a new OS to be as big a waste of time as taking too long to install one I already know.
I can tell you how to install Ubuntu much faster and with, I suspect, a much higher rate of success than I can tell you how to install XP and associated drivers and software. Here, I'll give it a shot: go to Best Buy and purchase Ubuntu for 19.95, go home and turn your computer on, put the DVD in. Restart the computer and wait a couple of minutes. When you see a picture of an orange bird, you will also see a button with the word Install beneath it. There will be a couple of easy questions like, what time zone are you in and what your name is. It'll tell you when you can reboot and start using your new system. Much easier than the XP install, I promise you even for a brand new user.
I hope you're not suggesting that there is no way to pirate videos remotely on an XP box. Not only is it done by millions of people daily, but it's a rather dubious feature by which an OS should be qualified!
Not by any means. What I was suggesting, and I may be wrong, is that you can't remotely pirate videos on an XP box that is missing a video card. It won't even boot up. Point being, I can install Linux on a computer that doesn't even have a monitor attached and then using the tools I outlined above, along with ssh, I can login to said box and sail the high seas in style. I can login to it from my cell phone with putty. I can't use remote desktop on my phone. Why wouldn't I want a video card you ask? Well, first of all, why use unnecessary hardware, second of all, video cards are a useless additional power drains in this scenario. Why waste the electricity?
XP's appearance and functionality is completely customizable. It requires some scripting, but there are countless mods to be found with a quick Google search, much e
Here are my issues with Windows and why I personally don't use it.
1. No native package management. With Linux, I just click on Synaptic, type what I'm looking for in the Search box, check it and hit apply. Done. Windows? Ha.
1a. apt-get update && apt-get upgrade. Self-explanatory (I hope).
2. Linux viruses, something like zero. Windows, last time I checked numbered in the millions. Maybe that is Microsoft's fault, maybe it isn't. Who knows. I don't really care.
3. When I've installed Windows, it always turned into a driver and software hunt odyssey. Honestly, you get sick of that after a while. I kind of like taking the 20-30 minutes to install Linux and everything just working. I know there are a plethora of horror stories about Linux not working on a particular hardware set. In the last several years, I have had Linux choke on 1 piece of hardware. It was a sis190 ethernet adapter of all things. Upgraded the kernel, fixed. Took maybe an hour.
4. Screen, elinks, and rtorrent. I work on the road a lot and I like my Battlestar Galactica's and my Heroes, etc. waiting on me when I get home. I could do that with windows with remote desktop, only problem is, my server doesn't have a graphics card and last I checked, XP won't run without one. Correct me if I'm wrong. Linux, on the other hand, is more than happy to practically run on a ham sandwich. That was a joke but you get the point.
5. The infinite customizability of KDE. I like my desktop a certain way. I'm sure there is a way to move the minimize button into the top left corner in windows so you can just shoot the mouse over there and minimize your window. I just haven't taken the time to figure it out. I'm also sure there is a way to hold down the alt and the mouse keys to resize and move windows. Also, an easy button to click to make a window stay on top or bottom. I can easily do all of that and much more in KDE. How about Windows?
6. On my core 2 duo with 2 gigs of RAM, when I click on an icon or start a program from the command line, things happen practically instantly. This thing came with Vista so I decided I would at least see what I would miss when I wiped it. It was the slowest most horrible OS I have ever used. I would use Windows Me before I would use Vista. In short, I have little patience for a multi-second disk churn before my programs start. Not a problem in Linux.
7. Konqueror. Only thing close in Windows that I have seen is Directory Opus. Konqueror is still better with more features, etc. and Directory Opus aint free.
8. Stability. Linux (properly configured by somebody that knows what they are doing) is rock solid. My server runs Debian etch. It has never so much as thought about crashing. Windows? I had an XP box running 24/7 a while back. It went down roughly once a week. This was on the exact same hardware as what Etch is on now. Maybe it was a fluke. Only thing I know is, when I rdesktop'ed into it, it was a crap shoot whether I'd get connection refused or not. That is infuriating. No longer a problem.
9. Out of the box, if someone is using a Linux computer, you can share their screen over a network. Windows XP, don't think so. You log into an XP box, the local screen logs out. And if the person is running XP home which most are, you can't even do remote terminal services at all. WTF?
I really could go on and on. But those are just a few of the reasons for my own personal brand of Windows hate. Flame away.
I'm going to hazard a guess and say the two "levels" of passwords are the one you set in the BIOS for when the computer is turned on and a Windows password. The level of incompetence required for the lady to act like that is some kind of protection boggles the mind. It doesn't take 9 days to pull a hard drive out of a laptop and image it on another computer. She probably should have just kept her mouth shut.
I saw the subject to your comment and the first thought that sprang my mind was that this was going to be some dig towards BSD users. I think I spend too much time here.
Why is it so hard for the open source community to admit that it is software communism?
Personally, I wouldn't give a fuck if it's communist or what. Call it what you want. I use GPL software, specifically Linux, because it fulfills my needs better than the alternatives. Not only that but it gives me a sense of ownership of my own computer rather than I'm just borrowing it at the behest of Microsoft. Since using Linux, my computer is fun again. Basically, I'm just frankly more happy with it.
If that makes me communist or whatever then strike up the band, comrade.
Yeah, and it only takes one person to screen scrape each page and repackage it into another pdf. And that's just one way. I'm sure there are dozens of easier ways that work equally well to make drm on the electronic printed word as useless as a bicycle for a fish.
Slashdot Mirror
For your global shortcuts, at least, you can always just use xbindkeys. A very powerful global shortcuts daemon. It's completely independent of the window manager and should be in the repositories of most distros. It gets really interesting when you combine it with the xmacro GUI scripting program to do things that aren't CLI scriptable such as certain types of interactions with virtual machines. For example, I like to hit a hotkey in Linux and certain things automatically happen in a virtual machine I'm running. That's not something I've been able to script with bash. However, xmacro has no trouble taking over the mouse and keyboard briefly, running into the virtual machine, doing what I've set it up to do and then quickly handing back control to me. It makes some normally repetitive and tedious tasks quite fast and easy.
When the mistake drops down, highlight it and press shift+delete.
And when this country gets to the point to where more than 50 percent of the voting population isn't paying in, what's to stop them from voting in politicians who will give them everything?
With Arch installed, according to free, there are 17 MB being used by actual programs at the desktop with no extra programs being started by me. The other 175 are, of course, being used for cache. With Firefox going, 51 MB of RAM would be used. The rest being available, and being used, for cache. I get how this cache thing works. I understand that you want as much in cache as possible. I'm not using DOS. These are modern operating systems and that's how they work. I'm not saying "ZOMGWTF WHERE'S MAh RAMS!"
Here is the crux of the matter. All things being equal, you still want the lightest footprint OS as it leaves more left over for cache. Case in point, Arch loads programs faster than Ubuntu on my machine. A lot of that has to do with the fact that there is more RAM left over for it to cache to. As far as Vista and XP are concerned, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the caching system/algorithm in Vista is better than the one for XP so although Vista itself may use up 400MB, leaving the other 612 MB in a 1 Gig system for caching, it still starts programs better than what you would get from the 900 MB that would be left over on the same system after a base install of XP. Of course, this leads us to one of the crucial differences between open and closed source OS's. Wouldn't it be great to just use the Vista caching system in XP? You could have the speed advantage of XP with the latency advantage of Vista. Only problem is, nobody except Microsoft is privy to the underlying code necessary to make backporting non-trivial Vista features to XP possible. With FOSS, this isn't the case. I can install a lightweigh fast distro like Arch and still use the latest latency reducing features like preload, for example, of any other version of Linux.
I hope I wasn't unclear.
Enter Arch Linux. Installed to a CLI in about 10 minutes. Getting the wi-fi working from the cli with wpa_supplicant and the zd1211 firmware for my card was a breeze. Then I proceeded to download and install xorg and icewm. All told, at a cli with wi-fi working it idles at eleven MB. Logged in to icewm it sits at 17. And with firefox running, a grand total of 51 Megabytes. And of course, it's blazing. With Firefox 2, it's at least as fast as my Pentium 4 laptop running Debian with Firefox 3. And, of course everything works in Firefox. Flash 10, etc.
Although what I've said doesn't speak completely to your point, suffice it to say, depending on your setup, you aren't doomed to a slower computer when running reasonably up to date software.
You quite nicely summed up what I was saying. Thank you.
The takeaway is, as you have intimated, why do we need so many different distro's with so many ways of doing things? If Asus had just left well enough alone and hadn't tried to hide things like the terminal, that customer might have gotten his wifi working and been happy. Now, they are probably asking themselves, why they bought this non-functional Linux crap when they could have just gotten good old Windows instead. That's just a real world concrete example of the consequences of reinventing a perfectly functional wheel and alienating new Linux users.
As far as multi-touch, that's obviously something that has to be implemented in hardware first and this monitor, which is several years old, by the way, just doesn't have it. So, even if Linux had it, I wouldn't be able to use it. I did take the liberty of Googling multi-touch and linux and it is on the table, so to speak so support is coming. You'll just have to have a touchscreen that works that way.
For warranty issues, hell, a hair dryer gets hot enough to soften the glue that holds the little "void warranty" stickers they put over that one screw hole. Just heat it up, pull it off, do what you are doing then put it right back on good as new.
Of course, I am a bit selective in the hardware I buy. I love using Linux on my computers and wouldn't use anything else so I am willing to do the little bit of research necessary to purchase hardware that works with it as opposed to getting whatever is the cheapest on newegg and hoping that I won't have any problems.
Everything the owners of N8xx's wish they were but aren't. Particularly the USB host support in addition to the half-assed USB on-the-go crap. 600MHz ARM overclockable to 900, 3D graphics hardware that you can actually use. You can easily install a real version of Linux and not be stuck with the Maemo cut-rate stuff like on the N-series. I know that's fixable but it isn't easy. Support for up to 64 GB worth of SDHC cards. S-video out, the list goes on and on. They have a video on the site of it running Xubuntu and Firefox 3 quite snappily. The only reason I'm sticking with my N770 for now is the Pandora looks a little bit bigger than pocketable.
Of course, I'm not completely up on my Windows fresh install software hunt lore as I happen to use a little program called synaptic to do my post install goody searching but to each his own.
the USB dongles look ugly sticking out of the side.
I always wonder at this when people bring it up. When I got my 3G modem from Verizon, I specifically got the USB720 USB dongle for the specific reason that it is what it is. An easy way to get any computer on the internet that has nothing more than a USB port to stick it in. I can't tell you how many times I've run different desktops and laptops with it while troubleshooting to get them on the net for drivers, software, etc. Most modern Linux distro's have drivers for it built right in. I believe OSX does too. Of course, Windows doesn't but, I just boot a live CD to work with those. In fact, my Intrepid CD is zero config. You just load it up on the Live CD, plug in the modem and click connect. You don't have to tell it /dev/usbtty0 or whatever it is, you don't have to type in #777 or anything, it just works. I have no interest in a built in 3G modem that can only be used on the particular hardware it came on. Just added expense in my (net)book.
I'm also jealous. You got a smoking deal on that laptop.
It constantly locks up requiring a reset. And when I reset it, it's a crapshoot whether it will hang on the boot screen requiring me to remove and reinsert the battery. I constantly have to recalibrate the touch screen or my touch gets farther and farther off the mark. No command line. No USB host support though I guess that's more the fault of the device. Still sucks though. When I receive a call, it might ring, then again it might not. The UI is all-around slow. It's like you push a button and when it feels like it, it will respond, and this thing has a 400 MHz processor. I realize it's an ARM but still.
I could go on and on but suffice it to say, this thing sucks. I eschewed Windows on my desktop for Linux a long time ago and I wish so bad there were a legitimate Linux alternative for my phone. You have no idea how happy I would be to have a Linux based PDA phone. I looked at the Openmoko but, without 3G data, it doesn't make much sense. Though with USB host support, maybe I can use it with my USB720 modem. Any thoughts? One day. One more thing, the idea of WinCE on a netbook is a bad joke.
Highly recommended. I haven't found anything better.
I had heard nothing but good things about apt-get and dpkg so the next distro out of the pile for me to try was Ubuntu. And the rest has been history. It worked perfectly out of the box first time. Not cheesy like Linspire or PCLinuxOS and not too hard either. I think it's what you could call the Goldilocks distro. Not too tough but not condescending either. Whatever IT is, Ubuntu has it and its popularity attests to that.
Linux users are hilarious, because they have a laundry list of things which Windows "can't do"... meaning it's a huge list of things Windows CAN do but they don't know how, and don't care to figure out.
That's really great. So you're telling me, Windows can do everything Linux can, I just don't know how. Okay, cool. Please explain to me how I can install Windows NT[4-6]on my Linksys router. I see. And, oh, which version of Windows comes with every driver including the built in webcam on my laptop working out of the box? Oh. Okay, how about which Windows can I click add/remove programs, browse through an online repository of thousands of free fully functional programs and download and start using whatever I want with just the click of a button? Yeah. And, furthermore, which version of Windows can both update itself and every single one of my programs with security patches, enhanced functionality, newer versions, etc. with the mere click of a button and a typed password? I thought not. And, admittedly though it's not for everyone, which version of Vista should I pay my hard earned money to so I can have spinning cubes on my desktop?
Windows is pure legacy. Unix is the future.
My point? I'll make a fresh one just for you. Cause I like you. Your anecdote is atypical for Windows. My anecdote is typical for Debian. IOW, you got lucky. I was just enjoying the same stability and trouble freeness that almost all other competent server administrators enjoy.
XP is also not aimed at a market that installs/uninstalls software on a daily basis.
Funny you say that. Everytime I boot a computer on a Windows installation disk, it refuses to recognize any other file system other than NTFS of FAT. It also does not give me any option or warning when installing it that it is wiping my MBR thus rendering all other non-windows operating systems on my computer unbootable until I go in and fix it by hand. Something most users are not going to be able to do. Contrary to what you say, it seems like they think their OS is for everybody and no other system is necessary or even exists.
The only thing self-explanatory about that is how linux users have their own language, further reinforcing how much an investment of time it is to learn to use it.
Possibly true. However, learning the linux user language is entirely unnecessary in this regard. If updates are available, a little icon pops up on your toolbar that goes something along the lines of "Click me to update". Surely non linux linguists can parse that. I merely pointed out the former method as candy for the audience I am speaking to here on Slashdot.
I haven't heard a first-hand account of any XP user I know suffering any significant inconvenience from a virus having installed free anti-virus software (Avast).
No doubt. Good thing all those XP users are running quality free anti-virus tools like Avast right? Right? Point being that many windows users in fact do not use any form of anti-virus app at all. I guess that's their fault. Hey, keeps all the mom and pop computer shop service departments open, yes? I can't speak too loudly, I don't run anti-virus either. Oh, wait...
How long did it take you to learn to install linux? Are you willing to spend that time over and over teaching XP users how to install linux? The primary advantage of XP is how widespread the knowledge base is. Linux information is widely accessible too, but not necessarily from someone across the street. I consider learning a new OS to be as big a waste of time as taking too long to install one I already know.
I can tell you how to install Ubuntu much faster and with, I suspect, a much higher rate of success than I can tell you how to install XP and associated drivers and software. Here, I'll give it a shot: go to Best Buy and purchase Ubuntu for 19.95, go home and turn your computer on, put the DVD in. Restart the computer and wait a couple of minutes. When you see a picture of an orange bird, you will also see a button with the word Install beneath it. There will be a couple of easy questions like, what time zone are you in and what your name is. It'll tell you when you can reboot and start using your new system. Much easier than the XP install, I promise you even for a brand new user.
I hope you're not suggesting that there is no way to pirate videos remotely on an XP box. Not only is it done by millions of people daily, but it's a rather dubious feature by which an OS should be qualified!
Not by any means. What I was suggesting, and I may be wrong, is that you can't remotely pirate videos on an XP box that is missing a video card. It won't even boot up. Point being, I can install Linux on a computer that doesn't even have a monitor attached and then using the tools I outlined above, along with ssh, I can login to said box and sail the high seas in style. I can login to it from my cell phone with putty. I can't use remote desktop on my phone. Why wouldn't I want a video card you ask? Well, first of all, why use unnecessary hardware, second of all, video cards are a useless additional power drains in this scenario. Why waste the electricity?
XP's appearance and functionality is completely customizable. It requires some scripting, but there are countless mods to be found with a quick Google search, much e
1. No native package management. With Linux, I just click on Synaptic, type what I'm looking for in the Search box, check it and hit apply. Done. Windows? Ha.
1a. apt-get update && apt-get upgrade. Self-explanatory (I hope).
2. Linux viruses, something like zero. Windows, last time I checked numbered in the millions. Maybe that is Microsoft's fault, maybe it isn't. Who knows. I don't really care.
3. When I've installed Windows, it always turned into a driver and software hunt odyssey. Honestly, you get sick of that after a while. I kind of like taking the 20-30 minutes to install Linux and everything just working. I know there are a plethora of horror stories about Linux not working on a particular hardware set. In the last several years, I have had Linux choke on 1 piece of hardware. It was a sis190 ethernet adapter of all things. Upgraded the kernel, fixed. Took maybe an hour.
4. Screen, elinks, and rtorrent. I work on the road a lot and I like my Battlestar Galactica's and my Heroes, etc. waiting on me when I get home. I could do that with windows with remote desktop, only problem is, my server doesn't have a graphics card and last I checked, XP won't run without one. Correct me if I'm wrong. Linux, on the other hand, is more than happy to practically run on a ham sandwich. That was a joke but you get the point.
5. The infinite customizability of KDE. I like my desktop a certain way. I'm sure there is a way to move the minimize button into the top left corner in windows so you can just shoot the mouse over there and minimize your window. I just haven't taken the time to figure it out. I'm also sure there is a way to hold down the alt and the mouse keys to resize and move windows. Also, an easy button to click to make a window stay on top or bottom. I can easily do all of that and much more in KDE. How about Windows?
6. On my core 2 duo with 2 gigs of RAM, when I click on an icon or start a program from the command line, things happen practically instantly. This thing came with Vista so I decided I would at least see what I would miss when I wiped it. It was the slowest most horrible OS I have ever used. I would use Windows Me before I would use Vista. In short, I have little patience for a multi-second disk churn before my programs start. Not a problem in Linux.
7. Konqueror. Only thing close in Windows that I have seen is Directory Opus. Konqueror is still better with more features, etc. and Directory Opus aint free.
8. Stability. Linux (properly configured by somebody that knows what they are doing) is rock solid. My server runs Debian etch. It has never so much as thought about crashing. Windows? I had an XP box running 24/7 a while back. It went down roughly once a week. This was on the exact same hardware as what Etch is on now. Maybe it was a fluke. Only thing I know is, when I rdesktop'ed into it, it was a crap shoot whether I'd get connection refused or not. That is infuriating. No longer a problem.
9. Out of the box, if someone is using a Linux computer, you can share their screen over a network. Windows XP, don't think so. You log into an XP box, the local screen logs out. And if the person is running XP home which most are, you can't even do remote terminal services at all. WTF?
I really could go on and on. But those are just a few of the reasons for my own personal brand of Windows hate. Flame away.
I'm going to hazard a guess and say the two "levels" of passwords are the one you set in the BIOS for when the computer is turned on and a Windows password. The level of incompetence required for the lady to act like that is some kind of protection boggles the mind. It doesn't take 9 days to pull a hard drive out of a laptop and image it on another computer. She probably should have just kept her mouth shut.
I saw the subject to your comment and the first thought that sprang my mind was that this was going to be some dig towards BSD users. I think I spend too much time here.
Personally, I wouldn't give a fuck if it's communist or what. Call it what you want. I use GPL software, specifically Linux, because it fulfills my needs better than the alternatives. Not only that but it gives me a sense of ownership of my own computer rather than I'm just borrowing it at the behest of Microsoft. Since using Linux, my computer is fun again. Basically, I'm just frankly more happy with it.
If that makes me communist or whatever then strike up the band, comrade.
Yeah, and it only takes one person to screen scrape each page and repackage it into another pdf. And that's just one way. I'm sure there are dozens of easier ways that work equally well to make drm on the electronic printed word as useless as a bicycle for a fish.