I agree. I really thought it was Google and other companies killing Microsoft, not Linux. (By the way, Linux is a kernel and a trademark, nothing more.)
The attitude seems very unprofessional in some sense when you compare to the proprietary software companies who will always claim they do what their customers ask of them (even if they do not).
Pidgin users were furious over a feature change and the Pidgin developers simply responded: "We do what we like." Pidgin is nearly considered part of GNOME because it's still GTK+ and right now it is IMO the best alternative to real AIM (AIM also has a Linux version now).
I agree 100%. GNOME has those stupid big ugly buttons (which always look better with ugly colours too; brown, beige, etc). And I've heard 'The bigger the better'. Even the old KDE design guide says it. Regardless, there is a reasonable limit and GNOME just goes too far. With that, I found GNOME to be TOO simple as a GUI and not for power-users. KDE all the way.
Do you use XP Lite? I would like to know. I know nLite has the option to 'remove' Internet Explorer. It will break a thousand things and more and cause some pretty irregular functionality, and also, stupid programs that rely upon the engine will not work at all.
Honestly, XP Lite just seems like a commercial alternative to nLite. And all nLite does is edit WINNT.SIF for you; I am sure (as it is required) XP Lite is still the same.
If you do use XP Lite and have removed IE with their app, go into system32 and see if you still have any IE-specific DLLs. These are required for explorer.exe to run. Namely: IERTUTIL.DLL, BROWSEUI.DLL. Or you can use something to see if explorer is still linked. Regardless, I am sure IE is not actually removed as it is not technically feasible without a lot of work.
An anti trust rule that forces Microsoft to make DX/D3D work with other platforms or open up the Windows API would work far better to break the monopoly. A similar thing is being done right now with open document standards (no anti trust laws here but government is moving towards the use of open documents which forces MS to stay compartible).
This would be great and help the Wine project. As well, it would definitely hinder the creation of exploits (viruses, certain spyware), etc. The benefits of an opened API are great.
However, don't forget that the Windows API (and every part therein) is a bit crazy to understand. Too many typedefs, and a lot of bugs.
It's still an open platform that runs any code you throw at it, provided it's compatible. The claim that Windows itself is a monopoly is complete and utter bollocks.
Monopoly is not the correct term at all. But Microsoft has the foothold of the market. This does mean (because there are no specific laws) Microsoft can include a web browser and whatever they like with their OS. Still, in EU or US, they CANNOT abuse their market dominance. This is akin to including a web browser and making it seem there is no alternative. On top of this, they have made Explorer and Internet Explorer integrate so tightly (even after IE7) that separating IE completely would be very difficult. If I go and 'remove' IE, all Windows does is remove the shortcuts. Does not delete files (except the.lnk files), does not fix dependency problems that would result, etc etc. nLite can remove IE from XP and 2000, but not completely. There are a great number of 'Internet Explorer' DLLs in system32.
People are comparing this to Apple's inclusion of Safari, and even KDE with Konqueror. At least on a Mac, you can remove Safari very easily (drag the icon from/Applications to the Trash). On both, the browsers are actually good (compliant with current standards and almost never go off creating their own). Perhaps people like us on Slashdot would not be complaining so much if IE was actually a good browser? I know I would have less of a reason to complain. Also on KDE, you can now use Dolphin which has no built-in web browser.
Windows needs a package manager that works. An installation system that is secure and works. I could go on and on.
Furthermore, old programs that called upon IE's engine (Quicken, McAfee to name a few) need to run in a special mode that is secured from the rest of the OS. HTAs and anything else directly reliant upon IE or the engine need to do the same. IE and Windows Explorer are tightly linked (contrary to popular belief). Remove one and you may have functionality but not full functionality.
The biggest reason why Windows sucks when it comes to security and stability: backward compatibility. This is a major reason why Microsoft (and probably many of its customers) would like to see IE stay included. I, too, like being able to run Windows 3.1 games on XP or Vista. But the size of the WinSxS (the folder with multiple versions of each DLL which all happen to have the same name stupidly) is huge, and for security reasons this is NOT worth it. This also could have been prevented. Make the number on the DLL file longer and change it with every major revision. This is exactly what happens with.so files on *nix.
The other problem is the great number of sites made for IE. Active sites like this need to be updated or be rejected by their users. Inactive sites are handled decently with WebKit or Gecko but they still exist and should be viewed correctly WITHOUT the need for IE.
KDE is Qt-based but with a lot of CRAP added on top, just for desktop integration reasons, much like GNOME on top of GTK+. I do not need GNOME to run many GNOME apps; this is not so much the case with KDE (at least with version 3).
I love Qt 4 by itself. It's stylish, looks good on Windows and Mac, very portable and a VERY easy API IMO. (Only thing I do not like very much is C++.)
My problem with desktop environments (which is the problem interoperability is SUPPOSED to solve) is there is barely any. You might be able to IMPORT settings from one desktop email app to another's (say they both use MBOX format). I found that KMail imports Thunderbird MBOX files terribly. Besides, if you have Kaffeine for a media player, how do you import those settings to another? Do we need standards here too (a standard settings file for media players)? (Personally I think it is a bit over the line, but could be very useful). Maybe a whole set of standard preferences files?
Right now I cannot move to KDE 4 or GNOME. I am a little bit stuck on KDE 3 (at least till KDE 4 can do everything correctly) and my life is in Kontact. I love KDE, but the ability to switch at any time with ease would be great.
Microsoft helped. They provided a means for hardware manufacturers to make drivers that are closed source (VxD files, sys files). Before that, everyone built their modules, programmed themselves from schematics, etc etc.
Solution: Modify BIOS hardware IDs, flash, install new network card. That is what I had to do and it works great. Now I have an Atheros ar5xxx and use madwifi drivers.
No, for one thing, I am not a big fan of PoP so I have no plans on playing it via any means.
IMO, it does not mean much to say 'Our game has no DRM and theirs does', they being EA or whoever. People will buy games DRM-laden or not, because, they have no idea. I am not going to buy a game just because the developer says 'Hey it has no DRM!'
DRM was always supposed to be invisible. People buy DVDs because the copy protection is completely invisible and has affected hardly anyone. Consoles prevent copies from running in the first place so most think that the only way to play a game is to get the real thing. Others are too afraid to pirate software (thinking they will get viruses, get caught, etc). So you get my point, people are ignorant, but it's not 100% their fault.
As far as Take2 and Rockstar with GTA, almost EVERY version of GTA for PC has been a terrible port in comparison to the console versions which worked seamlessly. GTA IV even has video modes people want to utilise but the graphics engine is so heavy even on the best systems that they cannot use them and Rockstar says that they are for future computers. I call bull on that one. On top of that, bugs that affected even legitimate users. Rockstar should get some better PC developers if they wish to keep making PC versions.
This is the game that Ubisoft was like 'We are selling this game with no DRM on PC. Let's see if these people really will put their money where their mouth is', meaning that now more people will buy it simply because there is no DRM.
This is NOT the reason I buy games. I buy games if they are good. Ubisoft thinks they might even get those people who are thinking to support Ubisoft in their effort to set an industry example. As IF.
But regardless, I refuse to buy EA and Take2 games. EA because of SecuROM and activation limitations and Take2 after the GTA IV fiasco that affected both legitimate users greatly (the game was bugged to hell!) and pirated users (do we care? Well, if security of the Windows system gets screwed up and leads to viruses spreading in the Windows world, then MS cares).
I really do believe most people who post here are very smart and intelligent people involved in some of the most important fields we currently have: technology of all kinds.
So why are we paying attention to this? Does this matter? Does it matter that some content is going to stored away (as IF the public will be able to access it easily and as IF the information will even matter)?
To me, this is a sign of Slashdot turning into Fox News and any other mainstream media. Slashdot is supposed to be the other side to me, the proponent of open source (led by SF) software and open standards of all types. Beyond that, science and technology breakthroughs, which are immense in the science section.
I know why this is a Slashdot story. It has the word terabyte in it. Therefore it goes in hardware? This should go in politics (the debauch of Slashdot IMO right next to user sent mail). Politics have no influence on technology and laws are only put in place to suppress it and admit we have no solution currently to a problem. Drugs: Let's jail all these people to our now mostly privatised jail system. Why? Because they had merely them. How? Because the US government pushed Afghanistan to produce more poppy seeds and become the world's largest producer for heroin. Check the facts, and do not read mainstream news.
But not for those with slower computers. Unfortunately it is near unbearable to use OpenOffice or any current open suites on old computers (pre-2000). You might as well install Puppy Linux or a custom ucLinux built on a separate toolchain on another system and have emacs or vim, antiword, and a few other CLI-based apps installed. That would be VERY efficient.
I agree, but the 'masses' believe they need to see what they are getting as they create it instead of clicking the equivalent of 'compile' in a LaTeX editor or using latex command itself.
As for OS compatibility, if you used a nice framework like say QT, you would get it while avoiding the instability and performance hit caused by java in the process.
I agree. Who wants to start a Qt4 fork? The goals would be NO Java dependencies, easy plugin API (C/C++/Python/Perl/Lua who knows what else), and a LOGICAL interface, which means no mimicking Office '97 or whatever.
I really really want to like Java and the idea of bytecode because of the possibility to have a universal language between platforms without even having to recompile, but regardless, this has not worked and when it does run at a 'decent rate', what rate will that be? The speeds of today's computers? All that for the sake of making programmer's lives easier (automatic garbage collection, much easier dynamic memory management) is not worth it IMO. Applications of this kind need to be written for utility AND speed. One is definitely good, but speed makes this much better.
Currently I have 3.0 installed (custom build --without-java) on Gentoo and it loads in decent time and once it is loaded it is OKAY. Regardless, I try to stay away from it and use LaTeX when I write any kind of document that will just be printed later. After learning LaTeX, the whole concept of a 'word processor' is kind of ridiculous. It is not that hard to write \textbf{} around text you need bolded. It is like HTML and it is easy to understand. Too many people are stuck on these WYSIWYG interfaces and all they do are slow these things down most of the time. The only useful one: a designer for a GUI.
I wish they would have Firefox do XviD and x264 natively.
Honestly, though, the whole Firefox source is HUGE along with xulrunner. I hope they trash Gecko and replace it with WebKit, else everyone is moving to Safari or Chrome. I heard a rumour they will do this with Firefox 4.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. I really thought it was Google and other companies killing Microsoft, not Linux. (By the way, Linux is a kernel and a trademark, nothing more.)
The attitude seems very unprofessional in some sense when you compare to the proprietary software companies who will always claim they do what their customers ask of them (even if they do not).
Pidgin users were furious over a feature change and the Pidgin developers simply responded: "We do what we like." Pidgin is nearly considered part of GNOME because it's still GTK+ and right now it is IMO the best alternative to real AIM (AIM also has a Linux version now).
I agree 100%. GNOME has those stupid big ugly buttons (which always look better with ugly colours too; brown, beige, etc). And I've heard 'The bigger the better'. Even the old KDE design guide says it. Regardless, there is a reasonable limit and GNOME just goes too far. With that, I found GNOME to be TOO simple as a GUI and not for power-users. KDE all the way.
Do you use XP Lite? I would like to know. I know nLite has the option to 'remove' Internet Explorer. It will break a thousand things and more and cause some pretty irregular functionality, and also, stupid programs that rely upon the engine will not work at all.
Honestly, XP Lite just seems like a commercial alternative to nLite. And all nLite does is edit WINNT.SIF for you; I am sure (as it is required) XP Lite is still the same.
If you do use XP Lite and have removed IE with their app, go into system32 and see if you still have any IE-specific DLLs. These are required for explorer.exe to run. Namely: IERTUTIL.DLL, BROWSEUI.DLL. Or you can use something to see if explorer is still linked. Regardless, I am sure IE is not actually removed as it is not technically feasible without a lot of work.
An anti trust rule that forces Microsoft to make DX/D3D work with other platforms or open up the Windows API would work far better to break the monopoly. A similar thing is being done right now with open document standards (no anti trust laws here but government is moving towards the use of open documents which forces MS to stay compartible).
This would be great and help the Wine project. As well, it would definitely hinder the creation of exploits (viruses, certain spyware), etc. The benefits of an opened API are great.
However, don't forget that the Windows API (and every part therein) is a bit crazy to understand. Too many typedefs, and a lot of bugs.
It's still an open platform that runs any code you throw at it, provided it's compatible. The claim that Windows itself is a monopoly is complete and utter bollocks.
Monopoly is not the correct term at all. But Microsoft has the foothold of the market. This does mean (because there are no specific laws) Microsoft can include a web browser and whatever they like with their OS. Still, in EU or US, they CANNOT abuse their market dominance. This is akin to including a web browser and making it seem there is no alternative. On top of this, they have made Explorer and Internet Explorer integrate so tightly (even after IE7) that separating IE completely would be very difficult. If I go and 'remove' IE, all Windows does is remove the shortcuts. Does not delete files (except the .lnk files), does not fix dependency problems that would result, etc etc. nLite can remove IE from XP and 2000, but not completely. There are a great number of 'Internet Explorer' DLLs in system32.
People are comparing this to Apple's inclusion of Safari, and even KDE with Konqueror. At least on a Mac, you can remove Safari very easily (drag the icon from /Applications to the Trash). On both, the browsers are actually good (compliant with current standards and almost never go off creating their own). Perhaps people like us on Slashdot would not be complaining so much if IE was actually a good browser? I know I would have less of a reason to complain. Also on KDE, you can now use Dolphin which has no built-in web browser.
Windows needs a package manager that works. An installation system that is secure and works. I could go on and on.
Furthermore, old programs that called upon IE's engine (Quicken, McAfee to name a few) need to run in a special mode that is secured from the rest of the OS. HTAs and anything else directly reliant upon IE or the engine need to do the same. IE and Windows Explorer are tightly linked (contrary to popular belief). Remove one and you may have functionality but not full functionality.
The biggest reason why Windows sucks when it comes to security and stability: backward compatibility. This is a major reason why Microsoft (and probably many of its customers) would like to see IE stay included. I, too, like being able to run Windows 3.1 games on XP or Vista. But the size of the WinSxS (the folder with multiple versions of each DLL which all happen to have the same name stupidly) is huge, and for security reasons this is NOT worth it. This also could have been prevented. Make the number on the DLL file longer and change it with every major revision. This is exactly what happens with .so files on *nix.
The other problem is the great number of sites made for IE. Active sites like this need to be updated or be rejected by their users. Inactive sites are handled decently with WebKit or Gecko but they still exist and should be viewed correctly WITHOUT the need for IE.
I agree.
It is. And a lot of old programs will not run without the engine being present.
Add some RIAA-represented metal music to it and yes.
...no reason for Gnome to exist anymore! ;)
KDE is Qt-based but with a lot of CRAP added on top, just for desktop integration reasons, much like GNOME on top of GTK+. I do not need GNOME to run many GNOME apps; this is not so much the case with KDE (at least with version 3).
I love Qt 4 by itself. It's stylish, looks good on Windows and Mac, very portable and a VERY easy API IMO. (Only thing I do not like very much is C++.)
My problem with desktop environments (which is the problem interoperability is SUPPOSED to solve) is there is barely any. You might be able to IMPORT settings from one desktop email app to another's (say they both use MBOX format). I found that KMail imports Thunderbird MBOX files terribly. Besides, if you have Kaffeine for a media player, how do you import those settings to another? Do we need standards here too (a standard settings file for media players)? (Personally I think it is a bit over the line, but could be very useful). Maybe a whole set of standard preferences files?
Right now I cannot move to KDE 4 or GNOME. I am a little bit stuck on KDE 3 (at least till KDE 4 can do everything correctly) and my life is in Kontact. I love KDE, but the ability to switch at any time with ease would be great.
I kind of followed the guide here: http://www.richud.com/HP-Pavilion-104-Bios-Fix/
There's no absolute instructions as every BIOS (and possibly every BIOS version) has the hardware IDs at a different offset.
You could also brick your laptop. So be careful!
Microsoft helped. They provided a means for hardware manufacturers to make drivers that are closed source (VxD files, sys files). Before that, everyone built their modules, programmed themselves from schematics, etc etc.
Solution: Modify BIOS hardware IDs, flash, install new network card. That is what I had to do and it works great. Now I have an Atheros ar5xxx and use madwifi drivers.
hahahahahaha
No, for one thing, I am not a big fan of PoP so I have no plans on playing it via any means.
IMO, it does not mean much to say 'Our game has no DRM and theirs does', they being EA or whoever. People will buy games DRM-laden or not, because, they have no idea. I am not going to buy a game just because the developer says 'Hey it has no DRM!'
DRM was always supposed to be invisible. People buy DVDs because the copy protection is completely invisible and has affected hardly anyone. Consoles prevent copies from running in the first place so most think that the only way to play a game is to get the real thing. Others are too afraid to pirate software (thinking they will get viruses, get caught, etc). So you get my point, people are ignorant, but it's not 100% their fault.
As far as Take2 and Rockstar with GTA, almost EVERY version of GTA for PC has been a terrible port in comparison to the console versions which worked seamlessly. GTA IV even has video modes people want to utilise but the graphics engine is so heavy even on the best systems that they cannot use them and Rockstar says that they are for future computers. I call bull on that one. On top of that, bugs that affected even legitimate users. Rockstar should get some better PC developers if they wish to keep making PC versions.
This is the game that Ubisoft was like 'We are selling this game with no DRM on PC. Let's see if these people really will put their money where their mouth is', meaning that now more people will buy it simply because there is no DRM.
This is NOT the reason I buy games. I buy games if they are good. Ubisoft thinks they might even get those people who are thinking to support Ubisoft in their effort to set an industry example. As IF.
But regardless, I refuse to buy EA and Take2 games. EA because of SecuROM and activation limitations and Take2 after the GTA IV fiasco that affected both legitimate users greatly (the game was bugged to hell!) and pirated users (do we care? Well, if security of the Windows system gets screwed up and leads to viruses spreading in the Windows world, then MS cares).
Agreed.
I really do believe most people who post here are very smart and intelligent people involved in some of the most important fields we currently have: technology of all kinds.
So why are we paying attention to this? Does this matter? Does it matter that some content is going to stored away (as IF the public will be able to access it easily and as IF the information will even matter)?
To me, this is a sign of Slashdot turning into Fox News and any other mainstream media. Slashdot is supposed to be the other side to me, the proponent of open source (led by SF) software and open standards of all types. Beyond that, science and technology breakthroughs, which are immense in the science section.
I know why this is a Slashdot story. It has the word terabyte in it. Therefore it goes in hardware? This should go in politics (the debauch of Slashdot IMO right next to user sent mail). Politics have no influence on technology and laws are only put in place to suppress it and admit we have no solution currently to a problem. Drugs: Let's jail all these people to our now mostly privatised jail system. Why? Because they had merely them. How? Because the US government pushed Afghanistan to produce more poppy seeds and become the world's largest producer for heroin. Check the facts, and do not read mainstream news.
But not for those with slower computers. Unfortunately it is near unbearable to use OpenOffice or any current open suites on old computers (pre-2000). You might as well install Puppy Linux or a custom ucLinux built on a separate toolchain on another system and have emacs or vim, antiword, and a few other CLI-based apps installed. That would be VERY efficient.
I agree, but the 'masses' believe they need to see what they are getting as they create it instead of clicking the equivalent of 'compile' in a LaTeX editor or using latex command itself.
As for OS compatibility, if you used a nice framework like say QT, you would get it while avoiding the instability and performance hit caused by java in the process.
I agree. Who wants to start a Qt4 fork? The goals would be NO Java dependencies, easy plugin API (C/C++/Python/Perl/Lua who knows what else), and a LOGICAL interface, which means no mimicking Office '97 or whatever.
I really really want to like Java and the idea of bytecode because of the possibility to have a universal language between platforms without even having to recompile, but regardless, this has not worked and when it does run at a 'decent rate', what rate will that be? The speeds of today's computers? All that for the sake of making programmer's lives easier (automatic garbage collection, much easier dynamic memory management) is not worth it IMO. Applications of this kind need to be written for utility AND speed. One is definitely good, but speed makes this much better.
Currently I have 3.0 installed (custom build --without-java) on Gentoo and it loads in decent time and once it is loaded it is OKAY. Regardless, I try to stay away from it and use LaTeX when I write any kind of document that will just be printed later. After learning LaTeX, the whole concept of a 'word processor' is kind of ridiculous. It is not that hard to write \textbf{} around text you need bolded. It is like HTML and it is easy to understand. Too many people are stuck on these WYSIWYG interfaces and all they do are slow these things down most of the time. The only useful one: a designer for a GUI.
I wish they would have Firefox do XviD and x264 natively.
Honestly, though, the whole Firefox source is HUGE along with xulrunner. I hope they trash Gecko and replace it with WebKit, else everyone is moving to Safari or Chrome. I heard a rumour they will do this with Firefox 4.
Adobe spends money to develop these technologies as does Microsoft. They are not going to hand out that much for free, even as in beer.
I wish every developer would look past proprietary things like Flash and AIR and use web standards instead, but I know this will never happen.