Most Novell development is Gnome oriented? Is that why Novell developed so many of their tools using QT? I'd argue that openSUSE is perhaps the best if not one of the best KDE desktops out there. KDE is clearly an after thought on Ubuntu, but very well polished in openSUSE. And every single Novell/Suse specific tool in the distro has a QT version, if not developed exclusively in QT.
You also suggest there are only 3 major distros which is also pretty short sighted. Mandriva isn't a major distro? What about Gentoo? Or Debian? Or PCLinuxOS?
And SUSE ships one of their versions with KDE as the default. You say SLED defaults to Gnome, and I wouldn't know because I haven't tried it. Either way, you can't claim that SUSE on the whole defaults to Gnome or focuses more effort on Gnome. And the parent statement is still very much false. Not every major distro has switched to Gnome. Most major distros provide support for both.
PCLinuxOS - pretty much the opposite of Ubuntu. They release KDE primarily, and then do a Gnome version seperately. Ubuntu - Again, the opposite, but they do both. openSUSE - KDE predominately. Fedora - Again, supports both. Fedora 9 will use KDE 4. Mint - Basically Ubuntu, but they release for both. Sabayon - KDE by default, and all the theming is for KDE. Mandriva - KDE primarily.
You can go down the list, but you end up getting small distros that either ship with neither by default (Gentoo, Arch) or stuff like DSL use neither.
Ubuntu is growing in popularity, and they are Gnome primarily. But that doesn't mean every distro switched to Gnome. It just isn't true. With KDE 4 using even less memory than KDE 3, I think KDE looks more and more promising all the time.
DRM = Studio support, so that isn't going away anytime soon.
However, as far as a finalized spec is concerned, so long as you can upgrade your player with firmware downloads, who cares? Let them continue to make the product better. The PS3 for instance is getting support for newer BluRay features with each new firmware, and I know stand alone BluRay players have supported upgrades as well.
I saw a demo of a minimalist version that couldn't even display the bootsplash. The Microsoft presenter said in true minimalist mode, all it could display was ANSI.
I'm late to this bandwagon. We finally bought GH3 this past weekend and my wife and I can't stop playing it.
I'm just wondering a few things that hopefully the mighty-Slashdot crowd can hopefully answer.
Why are the PS3 guitars 2.4 Ghz instead of Bluetooth? Is this really a cost-saving move? They have to include a dongle, and I can't power on the system with the controller. This just seems stupid.
Why can't I find any stand alone PS3 wireless guitars anywhere?
Why aren't the buttons analog? I imagine the game would be more realistic if you could press the fret button harder to extend the note, or perhaps strum harder to play louder, etc?
Can you play GH 1 & 2 on a PS3 with the PS3 controller, or do you need the PS2 guitar and the adapter?
> Prevented you? You do realize it can be disabled?
Even after disabling UAC I had an installer that wouldn't run because Windows wouldn't allow the installer access to C:\Program Files.
> Wow, I know Vista drivers have been a little slow out the gate... But to compare it to Linux.
Linux has all the drivers in the kernel. No hunting. No worrying about supporting old hardware. In fact, Linux drivers cover more hardware than any OS in history. Linux drivers have a consistent ABI, are open-source, and are more actively maintained on the whole. There are some holes in Linux drivers, such as wireless support, which has gotten MUCH better in the past year, but I'm literally staring at four pieces of hardware within 5 feet of me that I can only run on Linux. (I dual-boot). My scanner, flight stick, web cam, and two game pads all were supported with drivers for older versions of Windows. The flight stick's manufacturer doesn't even exist anymore. Good luck even finding a driver, let alone a working driver. With Vista, the driver situation is even worse than XP.
> Why should Vista be different? So you haven't actually sat down with it for a few days and tried to get work done? Nice. Let's bitch some more. Oh and it does have a classic mode for us die hard Win2k GUI fans.
I've spent about two days using it for personal use, which was two days too long. Work is also buying me a brand new laptop, and Vista is being formatted the second I get it. Regardless, why slow down your system and upgrade to just use a classic mode. You might as well just use Win2k or XP.
> DirectX 10.
DirectX 10 is a rant in and of itself. Slower than DX 9, and most games right now that support 10 also support 9. You're really better running it in DX 9 for multiple reasons. 1 - The OS will be faster. 2 - DX will be faster. 3 - The GPU's for DX 9 are faster and cheaper. 4 - Microsoft changed the DX 10 specs, and none of the DX 10.0 cards support 10.1, so they are worthless. Way to just shit all over the gamer crowd. Brilliant. And while I truly love PC gaming (enough to still dual-boot), more and more everyone is migrating to consoles for reasons like these. PC gaming isn't dead, but it is certainly dying.
> Games
Linux does have tons of games, most of which are free. I do dual-boot for Windows games, but with Cedega some people report that Windows games run even BETTER under Linux. I just haven't messed with it yet personally.
> Easy media consumption.
I'm honestly not sure what you're talking about. My Linux box supports more media formats, with no DRM problems. Vista has a really nasty bug. Play any audio, and lose 10% performance in networking. And then there are general system DRM slow-downs. And then let's talk about how they cripple HD video unless you have trusted hardware. Again, Linux is much better for media consumption.
> Something Linux has been very slow to provide. OSX is a better choice than Linux for most people.
Honestly, judging from your post, I'm not sure you know much about Linux. I won't pay the Apple tax on hardware. I work as a SysAdmin for a large newspaper. I don't directly support Macs, but we have plenty of them in the newsroom, and I do get roped into working on them occasionally. Most advantages Macs have these days are due to their Unix roots, except there is better driver support, and more software for Linux than Macs. There are even more games. And less DRM. In fact, the learning curve from say Windows to KDE to arguably easier than Windows to OS X.
I setup a laptop for a friend and installed some software for her. It threw a fit about the installer trying to access C:\Program Files so I installed to another location and then tried copying over the files manually, but no go.
And how is UAC going to save my butt?
And please name 1 realistic, real-world advantage Vista has over XP. I'm not a Microsoft hater, just a Vista hater.
Nope. I know about killing or replacing explorer. Seriously, Server 2008 can boot pretty stripped down with minimalist services and components. It was running a web server with less than 60 megs of memory. Windows Server 2003 minus explorer is not going to use less than 60 megs of memory.
I'm not trolling, but while Ubuntu seems to be the hot buzz-word of the Linux community, that doesn't make it the best.
Personally, I can't stand Ubuntu for a number of reasons. I'm glad it is working out for you, but if you're a convert from Windows, I'd seriously take a look at the KDE desktop as well, and some other distros. It can't hurt to look.
They break compatibility all the time when they change driver ABIs and Windows APIs. And they can reinvent the wheel with a new system that largely implements the old API through a means of emulation.
Modular design can easily allow to remove bloat and add features simultaneously. KDE 4 uses less memory than KDE 3 while offering a load of new features, and built-in composite support.
I understandably am giving Microsoft a good deal of credit here. Perhaps my post was a bit optimistic, but we have seen some proof of these claims. Microsoft is shifting the next version of Windows, which acknowledges Vista's failure. Their demonstrations of Server 2008 and XP SP3 demonstrate they are focusing on performance/removing-bloat.
* UAC - annoying and not remotely secure. People will be trained to always click yes, or just disable it. Further more, it prevented me from installing legit software, and copying files in certain directories. * Drivers - People say an OS is only as good as the software for it, and I'd argue an OS is only as good as the drivers. If you can't support your hardware, then software isn't even an issue. Now all drivers MUST be signed, yet many signed drivers don't work very well, if at all. I think it would be a good idea to have all drivers in one central repository (like the Linux kernel) so you won't have to worry about tracking down drivers for old hardware, but make sure the drivers work. And here is an idea, make the drivers modular. Drivers cause more BSODs and crashes than anything else. Don't let a single driver bring down a system. This is just basic common sense. * Design for productivity, and not looks. Sexy is sexy, and we all like sexy things. In the long run however, I want my computer to enable me to work, not prevent me from doing so. Usability studies have shown that Vista's UI slows people down performing the same tasks. Scrolling in the Start Menu? Again, the writing was on the wall here. Look at the UI changes in Windows Media Player, and you'll see a program that has become less user friendly, while prettier. Why should we expect Vista to be different? * Performance is piss-poor. Again, people like fast computers. Installing Vista is just a bad decision. * Vista's worst enemy is not OS X or Linux (as much as I love me some Linux). Vista's worst enemy is XP, which post-SP1 has been a pretty decent OS. For the end user, Vista provides no real benefits or new features besides better looks, while slowing your PC down considerably. And with projects like the Vista Transformation Pack, you can make XP look like Vista. Why would someone want Vista?
1 - Microsoft says they learned from their mistakes, and have been deconstructing Windows to remove bloat, and make the whole thing run faster. Windows Server can even run sans-GUI now, and they're building up from a minimalist stack. This is a really good thing.
2 - There were some neat concepts that were promised with Vista and never delivered, like the file abstraction stack, or WinFS. Now they might have time to do it right.
3 - Vista was a total bomb. There is no denying it at all. So why bother? Admit your mistake and move on quickly. All in all, this sounds like a surprisingly smart move on their part.
I thought it was leaked that Atari out-right paid for Driv3r reviews, many of which were extremely high despite the game sucking. When it came out, many sites claimed they only gave high reviews because they tested an early very-buggy build for a few hours, and then was told all the bugs would be fixed before retail ship. When the game actually shipped as a buggy mess (not to mention, a piss-poor game) the reviewers were claiming they never played the retail game and gave a review based on hype and expectations.
Either you believe what I consider a lie, and then reviews are worthless because they're based on hype, or you call them liars and reviews are worthless because publishers pay for them.
Take your pick. Personally, what I'm looking for (and what I rarely see) is a good description of how gameplay goes down. I don't need an arbitrary score, because the reviewer and I might not have the same tastes. We all like differen genres of games. But if the review does a very good job describing objectively what gameplay is like, then I might be able to decide for myself whether or not I will enjoy the game.
The United States is a mostly free country that I often defend, but we only have two parties in this country.
When Ross Perot was gaining support, exclusive deals were struck to keep him and all third parties out of major debates. News services agreed to offer exclusive coverage of the two parties. Effectively, we locked out third parties from even getting a chance to campaign. Ross Perot paid to rent time on PBS out of his own pocket since the networks wouldn't allow him to debate, let alone cover him, and no one watches PBS. All his forward momentum came crashing to a halt once he couldn't get coverage for his platforms.
There are only 2 parties here, but many other countries have far more than 2 parties.
It might have been more helpful to give a reference. X percent support the pirate party, which is Y percent below the average support a party gets in Sweden.
The hypervisor only locks out one part of the hardware, and it isn't completely locked out. In fact, only one function of one piece of hardware is locked out. On the 360, everything is completely locked out period. You're arguing the 360 is more open because you were able to hack it via an exploit. That isn't open.
In the end, being able to change hardware and install another OS is not equal to being completely locked out. I'm not sure how you're attempting to make that claim.
Apple has the same mechanic in every one of their products, and no one complains. They call Apple the saints of the PC world while bashing Sony.
Sony and IBM helped develop open-source drivers for the Cell, and allow you to use the Cell as you see fit. The only thing locked on the entire console is the hypervisor restricting access to the video card if you use an alternative operating system.
Again, please name one single console in history that openly invites you to swap out hardware, invites you to install another OS, and uses standard USB connectors to open up a whole world of hardware at the same time.
Slashdot Mirror
Most Novell development is Gnome oriented? Is that why Novell developed so many of their tools using QT? I'd argue that openSUSE is perhaps the best if not one of the best KDE desktops out there. KDE is clearly an after thought on Ubuntu, but very well polished in openSUSE. And every single Novell/Suse specific tool in the distro has a QT version, if not developed exclusively in QT.
You also suggest there are only 3 major distros which is also pretty short sighted. Mandriva isn't a major distro? What about Gentoo? Or Debian? Or PCLinuxOS?
And SUSE ships one of their versions with KDE as the default. You say SLED defaults to Gnome, and I wouldn't know because I haven't tried it. Either way, you can't claim that SUSE on the whole defaults to Gnome or focuses more effort on Gnome. And the parent statement is still very much false. Not every major distro has switched to Gnome. Most major distros provide support for both.
Going down the Distrowatch list:
PCLinuxOS - pretty much the opposite of Ubuntu. They release KDE primarily, and then do a Gnome version seperately.
Ubuntu - Again, the opposite, but they do both.
openSUSE - KDE predominately.
Fedora - Again, supports both. Fedora 9 will use KDE 4.
Mint - Basically Ubuntu, but they release for both.
Sabayon - KDE by default, and all the theming is for KDE.
Mandriva - KDE primarily.
You can go down the list, but you end up getting small distros that either ship with neither by default (Gentoo, Arch) or stuff like DSL use neither.
Ubuntu is growing in popularity, and they are Gnome primarily. But that doesn't mean every distro switched to Gnome. It just isn't true. With KDE 4 using even less memory than KDE 3, I think KDE looks more and more promising all the time.
DRM = Studio support, so that isn't going away anytime soon.
However, as far as a finalized spec is concerned, so long as you can upgrade your player with firmware downloads, who cares? Let them continue to make the product better. The PS3 for instance is getting support for newer BluRay features with each new firmware, and I know stand alone BluRay players have supported upgrades as well.
Forgive my ignorance, but I thought the common cold was anything but common. It is a virus with countless strains, each fairly different.
I never thought I'd say this, but kudos to EA.
I saw a demo of a minimalist version that couldn't even display the bootsplash. The Microsoft presenter said in true minimalist mode, all it could display was ANSI.
I'm late to this bandwagon. We finally bought GH3 this past weekend and my wife and I can't stop playing it.
I'm just wondering a few things that hopefully the mighty-Slashdot crowd can hopefully answer.
Why are the PS3 guitars 2.4 Ghz instead of Bluetooth? Is this really a cost-saving move? They have to include a dongle, and I can't power on the system with the controller. This just seems stupid.
Why can't I find any stand alone PS3 wireless guitars anywhere?
Why aren't the buttons analog? I imagine the game would be more realistic if you could press the fret button harder to extend the note, or perhaps strum harder to play louder, etc?
Can you play GH 1 & 2 on a PS3 with the PS3 controller, or do you need the PS2 guitar and the adapter?
> Prevented you? You do realize it can be disabled?
Even after disabling UAC I had an installer that wouldn't run because Windows wouldn't allow the installer access to C:\Program Files.
> Wow, I know Vista drivers have been a little slow out the gate... But to compare it to Linux.
Linux has all the drivers in the kernel. No hunting. No worrying about supporting old hardware. In fact, Linux drivers cover more hardware than any OS in history. Linux drivers have a consistent ABI, are open-source, and are more actively maintained on the whole. There are some holes in Linux drivers, such as wireless support, which has gotten MUCH better in the past year, but I'm literally staring at four pieces of hardware within 5 feet of me that I can only run on Linux. (I dual-boot). My scanner, flight stick, web cam, and two game pads all were supported with drivers for older versions of Windows. The flight stick's manufacturer doesn't even exist anymore. Good luck even finding a driver, let alone a working driver. With Vista, the driver situation is even worse than XP.
> Why should Vista be different? So you haven't actually sat down with it for a few days and tried to get work done? Nice. Let's bitch some more. Oh and it does have a classic mode for us die hard Win2k GUI fans.
I've spent about two days using it for personal use, which was two days too long. Work is also buying me a brand new laptop, and Vista is being formatted the second I get it. Regardless, why slow down your system and upgrade to just use a classic mode. You might as well just use Win2k or XP.
> DirectX 10.
DirectX 10 is a rant in and of itself. Slower than DX 9, and most games right now that support 10 also support 9. You're really better running it in DX 9 for multiple reasons. 1 - The OS will be faster. 2 - DX will be faster. 3 - The GPU's for DX 9 are faster and cheaper. 4 - Microsoft changed the DX 10 specs, and none of the DX 10.0 cards support 10.1, so they are worthless. Way to just shit all over the gamer crowd. Brilliant. And while I truly love PC gaming (enough to still dual-boot), more and more everyone is migrating to consoles for reasons like these. PC gaming isn't dead, but it is certainly dying.
> Games
Linux does have tons of games, most of which are free. I do dual-boot for Windows games, but with Cedega some people report that Windows games run even BETTER under Linux. I just haven't messed with it yet personally.
> Easy media consumption.
I'm honestly not sure what you're talking about. My Linux box supports more media formats, with no DRM problems. Vista has a really nasty bug. Play any audio, and lose 10% performance in networking. And then there are general system DRM slow-downs. And then let's talk about how they cripple HD video unless you have trusted hardware. Again, Linux is much better for media consumption.
> Something Linux has been very slow to provide. OSX is a better choice than Linux for most people.
Honestly, judging from your post, I'm not sure you know much about Linux. I won't pay the Apple tax on hardware. I work as a SysAdmin for a large newspaper. I don't directly support Macs, but we have plenty of them in the newsroom, and I do get roped into working on them occasionally. Most advantages Macs have these days are due to their Unix roots, except there is better driver support, and more software for Linux than Macs. There are even more games. And less DRM. In fact, the learning curve from say Windows to KDE to arguably easier than Windows to OS X.
I setup a laptop for a friend and installed some software for her. It threw a fit about the installer trying to access C:\Program Files so I installed to another location and then tried copying over the files manually, but no go.
And how is UAC going to save my butt?
And please name 1 realistic, real-world advantage Vista has over XP. I'm not a Microsoft hater, just a Vista hater.
Many manufacturers when pressed are giving free downgrades to XP.
Most any Unix system. In fact, you can configure the Linux kernel to forcibly remove a driver and then reload it when it has a problem.
Unless I'm mistaken, Vista requires all drivers to be signed, and removed the user-mode drivers.
Nope. I know about killing or replacing explorer. Seriously, Server 2008 can boot pretty stripped down with minimalist services and components. It was running a web server with less than 60 megs of memory. Windows Server 2003 minus explorer is not going to use less than 60 megs of memory.
I'm not trolling, but while Ubuntu seems to be the hot buzz-word of the Linux community, that doesn't make it the best.
Personally, I can't stand Ubuntu for a number of reasons. I'm glad it is working out for you, but if you're a convert from Windows, I'd seriously take a look at the KDE desktop as well, and some other distros. It can't hurt to look.
They break compatibility all the time when they change driver ABIs and Windows APIs. And they can reinvent the wheel with a new system that largely implements the old API through a means of emulation.
Modular design can easily allow to remove bloat and add features simultaneously. KDE 4 uses less memory than KDE 3 while offering a load of new features, and built-in composite support.
I understandably am giving Microsoft a good deal of credit here. Perhaps my post was a bit optimistic, but we have seen some proof of these claims. Microsoft is shifting the next version of Windows, which acknowledges Vista's failure. Their demonstrations of Server 2008 and XP SP3 demonstrate they are focusing on performance/removing-bloat.
Some people are reporting 10% increases in performance, and less memory usage with XP SP3.
And I watched a video demo of Server 2008 launched in a console only mode, which was running a web server and using hardly any memory at all.
I have used Vista. Sadly I have to use it fairly often as I support a great deal of computers via work.
Deleting a shortcut off your desktop as an individual user provokes UAC. That is just beyond insane.
Problems with Vista include:
* UAC - annoying and not remotely secure. People will be trained to always click yes, or just disable it. Further more, it prevented me from installing legit software, and copying files in certain directories.
* Drivers - People say an OS is only as good as the software for it, and I'd argue an OS is only as good as the drivers. If you can't support your hardware, then software isn't even an issue. Now all drivers MUST be signed, yet many signed drivers don't work very well, if at all. I think it would be a good idea to have all drivers in one central repository (like the Linux kernel) so you won't have to worry about tracking down drivers for old hardware, but make sure the drivers work. And here is an idea, make the drivers modular. Drivers cause more BSODs and crashes than anything else. Don't let a single driver bring down a system. This is just basic common sense.
* Design for productivity, and not looks. Sexy is sexy, and we all like sexy things. In the long run however, I want my computer to enable me to work, not prevent me from doing so. Usability studies have shown that Vista's UI slows people down performing the same tasks. Scrolling in the Start Menu? Again, the writing was on the wall here. Look at the UI changes in Windows Media Player, and you'll see a program that has become less user friendly, while prettier. Why should we expect Vista to be different?
* Performance is piss-poor. Again, people like fast computers. Installing Vista is just a bad decision.
* Vista's worst enemy is not OS X or Linux (as much as I love me some Linux). Vista's worst enemy is XP, which post-SP1 has been a pretty decent OS. For the end user, Vista provides no real benefits or new features besides better looks, while slowing your PC down considerably. And with projects like the Vista Transformation Pack, you can make XP look like Vista. Why would someone want Vista?
1 - Microsoft says they learned from their mistakes, and have been deconstructing Windows to remove bloat, and make the whole thing run faster. Windows Server can even run sans-GUI now, and they're building up from a minimalist stack. This is a really good thing.
2 - There were some neat concepts that were promised with Vista and never delivered, like the file abstraction stack, or WinFS. Now they might have time to do it right.
3 - Vista was a total bomb. There is no denying it at all. So why bother? Admit your mistake and move on quickly. All in all, this sounds like a surprisingly smart move on their part.
I thought it was leaked that Atari out-right paid for Driv3r reviews, many of which were extremely high despite the game sucking. When it came out, many sites claimed they only gave high reviews because they tested an early very-buggy build for a few hours, and then was told all the bugs would be fixed before retail ship. When the game actually shipped as a buggy mess (not to mention, a piss-poor game) the reviewers were claiming they never played the retail game and gave a review based on hype and expectations.
Either you believe what I consider a lie, and then reviews are worthless because they're based on hype, or you call them liars and reviews are worthless because publishers pay for them.
Take your pick. Personally, what I'm looking for (and what I rarely see) is a good description of how gameplay goes down. I don't need an arbitrary score, because the reviewer and I might not have the same tastes. We all like differen genres of games. But if the review does a very good job describing objectively what gameplay is like, then I might be able to decide for myself whether or not I will enjoy the game.
Neurotic is different from racist. And yes, we're all a little racist (thank you, Avenue Q) but he was a major bigot.
The United States is a mostly free country that I often defend, but we only have two parties in this country.
When Ross Perot was gaining support, exclusive deals were struck to keep him and all third parties out of major debates. News services agreed to offer exclusive coverage of the two parties. Effectively, we locked out third parties from even getting a chance to campaign. Ross Perot paid to rent time on PBS out of his own pocket since the networks wouldn't allow him to debate, let alone cover him, and no one watches PBS. All his forward momentum came crashing to a halt once he couldn't get coverage for his platforms.
There are only 2 parties here, but many other countries have far more than 2 parties.
It might have been more helpful to give a reference. X percent support the pirate party, which is Y percent below the average support a party gets in Sweden.
The hypervisor only locks out one part of the hardware, and it isn't completely locked out. In fact, only one function of one piece of hardware is locked out. On the 360, everything is completely locked out period. You're arguing the 360 is more open because you were able to hack it via an exploit. That isn't open.
In the end, being able to change hardware and install another OS is not equal to being completely locked out. I'm not sure how you're attempting to make that claim.
Apple has the same mechanic in every one of their products, and no one complains. They call Apple the saints of the PC world while bashing Sony.
Sony and IBM helped develop open-source drivers for the Cell, and allow you to use the Cell as you see fit. The only thing locked on the entire console is the hypervisor restricting access to the video card if you use an alternative operating system.
Again, please name one single console in history that openly invites you to swap out hardware, invites you to install another OS, and uses standard USB connectors to open up a whole world of hardware at the same time.