First of all, "Add/Remove software" has nothing to do with updating/upgrading windows
It's correct that it hasn't. But that's the main problem with it. See, the distros' update tools concern themselves with updates for my whole installation. Whatever updates I need I can get through apt. The very fact that in Windows I need Windows Update for updates to the OS and then Add/Remove Software for 3rd party stuff is not user friendly IMO. Why do I need 2 tools, with 2 completely different UIs for essentially the same task? Why should I even care if some program is part of the OS or from a third party? Heck, I just want to upgrade all my software.
You mean Windows Update, which the last time I checked did a hell of a better job than the update agent in RedHat [...] hardly newbie-proof
Without discussing the possible merits of RH's update tool (I have no idea about it), considering the fact the RedHat is clearly targeted to servers means that it may not be the pinnacle of newbie-proofness. Moot point, more ore less. Of course I agree that given the fees they charge it should work. Which Debian's apt does for me always. I don't do updates on Windows (only use it at work and we have staff for that) but I have heard numerous accounts that one should be wary with Windows updates, because especially driver stuff tends to not work without problems in all cases
The fact you're trashing "Add/Remove programs" shows how much you know about it;) Coupled with MS's.MSI format, it's one of the best software management tools out there
From a user's point of view I feel always severely handicapped compared to apt. Seriously, what does it do? I can add and remove software, but that's about it. I can't tell it to give a short summary about the app. I can't tell it to list all files this app has installed. I can't tell it to upgrade all listed software to newer versions, if available. I can't tell it to uninstall an app, but keep my configuration around. I can't tell it to fetch the source and compile locally. And so on, and so on. The new versions of Synaptic (GUI frontend to apt) beat it hands down in available functionality, and do a very good job making the functionality accessible. So, what exactly make it "one of the best software management tools out there"?
I can't remember to ever have upgraded the kernel on my windows machine. Hm, thinking of it, this may be because MS does not allow me to download new kernels from their kernel repository. I they did, it wouldn't be newbie-proof either. Therefore, your comment makes no sense whatsoever.
"Normal people" wait (and rightly so) for new packages coming from their distributor (Fedora, SuSE, Mandrake,...). Using the distribution's tool for software upgrades is, last time I checked, nearly as newbie-proof as possible for current distributions. At least each of them beats Windows' "Add/Remove software", which is a sorry excuse for a software manager, easily. I also find it more friendly than Microsoft's web-based update manager.
Thanks for that posting. I'd like to add one thing regarding the system as the USA has today is very close to fascism, it is a system in which big business runs the country, and where the government acts on their behalf, Mussolini's famous quote, "Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of State and corporate power."
You need to get out more if you think the US is the only place with a federal system.
Here, elections for different levels of government are often (not always) held on different days. Yes, people do care enough to go cast there votes on 2 or 3 days a year. Furthermore, who said anything about "little tickets"? Whats so hard about taking a letter-sized sheet or two for local level, another one for state level and another one for federal level with you into the booth? As far as voting for individual candidates is concerned: it's way overestimated. This stupid media spectacle of course has long ago started to take root here too (although often legally you still vote for a party). What do we get? A media ciscus that makes you vomit, and "individual" puppets wired into the big poll machine instead of organisations that stand for an agenda and actually have the power to support them.
So you're telling me that there were no elections until Diebold made them practical? Seems to me a touchscreen won't be of much help to people without limbs or who can't see.
Gee, for people who have any physical problem with a pen and paper setup we have notaries, or they bring a person whom they trust to fill it out for them. And for the immobile we have mobile elections committees.
My altruistic side says "because we don't want to kill off any life that developed independant of earth"
My selfish side says "because what's the point in starting Mars exploration when contaminate the exploration site at the first try"
My common sense side says "duh, you don't trample in there like the bull in the china shop"
My paranoic side says "we'll never, ever be sure what we found there if we aren't absolutely sure to have kept the site clean (assuming we don't find more than bacteria)"
My TV junkie side has seen enough of Kirk and Archer to know how not to behave
Someone's gotta say it: Information wants to be free.
As misused as this sentence is (esp. on/.), I think we see its true meaning at work here: Information, due to its inherent properties, tends to spread, and needs active containment to keep it secret. These measures can and will fail at some point in time
As far as I am concerned, I just foresee that the land mine producers get out of the bad press. After all, producing/selling land mines has become a business no self-respecting weapons producer wanted to be caught in, with all the removal problems and maimed children and stuff. Now it's going to be perfectly respectable: "Got a little war? Need to protect a strip of land? Choose from our range of Poof! (tm) land mines. Easy removal after annoyance has stopped!" If the weapons companies are smart, they'll merge with biotech companies (if they haven't already) and can then sell both the mines and the weed. Reminds me of my pet peeve of food and pharma companies merging - you can first sell food that makes people sick, and then sell drugs against that, both genetically engineered to perfectly complement each other.
As much as I like to read/. as a way to gain insights into the way the American mind works (or at least the American mind of a subset of the polulation I can relate to), I am often annoyed at the capitalism flags that get waved in droves at every occasion. I find it highly entertaining how quickly people turn around and suddenly find capitalism Not So Good. Welcome in the real world, don't forget the lesson you learned
This has to be the most frequently misrepresented utterance ever on/. and that says a lot.
information wants to be free always only meant one thing: that to contain it, you need to spend energy, since left to it's own devices it's going to spread. And since if once out, you can only contain it again by shooting everyone who knows, it is only going to be better known. That's it, not more, not less
+2 Funny/Insightful. Thank you. I was actually a bit surprised that nobody else commented on that. I mean, Hank! Seems it's true that/. readers are too young
Slashdot Mirror
First of all, "Add/Remove software" has nothing to do with updating/upgrading windows
;) Coupled with MS's .MSI format, it's one of the best software management tools out there
It's correct that it hasn't. But that's the main problem with it. See, the distros' update tools concern themselves with updates for my whole installation. Whatever updates I need I can get through apt. The very fact that in Windows I need Windows Update for updates to the OS and then Add/Remove Software for 3rd party stuff is not user friendly IMO. Why do I need 2 tools, with 2 completely different UIs for essentially the same task? Why should I even care if some program is part of the OS or from a third party? Heck, I just want to upgrade all my software.
You mean Windows Update, which the last time I checked did a hell of a better job than the update agent in RedHat [...] hardly newbie-proof
Without discussing the possible merits of RH's update tool (I have no idea about it), considering the fact the RedHat is clearly targeted to servers means that it may not be the pinnacle of newbie-proofness. Moot point, more ore less. Of course I agree that given the fees they charge it should work. Which Debian's apt does for me always.
I don't do updates on Windows (only use it at work and we have staff for that) but I have heard numerous accounts that one should be wary with Windows updates, because especially driver stuff tends to not work without problems in all cases
The fact you're trashing "Add/Remove programs" shows how much you know about it
From a user's point of view I feel always severely handicapped compared to apt. Seriously, what does it do? I can add and remove software, but that's about it. I can't tell it to give a short summary about the app. I can't tell it to list all files this app has installed. I can't tell it to upgrade all listed software to newer versions, if available. I can't tell it to uninstall an app, but keep my configuration around. I can't tell it to fetch the source and compile locally. And so on, and so on. The new versions of Synaptic (GUI frontend to apt) beat it hands down in available functionality, and do a very good job making the functionality accessible.
So, what exactly make it "one of the best software management tools out there"?
I can't remember to ever have upgraded the kernel on my windows machine. Hm, thinking of it, this may be because MS does not allow me to download new kernels from their kernel repository. I they did, it wouldn't be newbie-proof either. Therefore, your comment makes no sense whatsoever.
...). Using the distribution's tool for software upgrades is, last time I checked, nearly as newbie-proof as possible for current distributions. At least each of them beats Windows' "Add/Remove software", which is a sorry excuse for a software manager, easily. I also find it more friendly than Microsoft's web-based update manager.
"Normal people" wait (and rightly so) for new packages coming from their distributor (Fedora, SuSE, Mandrake,
http://www.mainconcept.com/mainactor_v5.shtml
Thanks for that posting. I'd like to add one thing regarding the system as the USA has today is very close to fascism, it is a system in which big business runs the country, and where the government acts on their behalf, Mussolini's famous quote, "Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of State and corporate power."
You need to get out more if you think the US is the only place with a federal system.
Here, elections for different levels of government are often (not always) held on different days. Yes, people do care enough to go cast there votes on 2 or 3 days a year.
Furthermore, who said anything about "little tickets"? Whats so hard about taking a letter-sized sheet or two for local level, another one for state level and another one for federal level with you into the booth?
As far as voting for individual candidates is concerned: it's way overestimated. This stupid media spectacle of course has long ago started to take root here too (although often legally you still vote for a party). What do we get? A media ciscus that makes you vomit, and "individual" puppets wired into the big poll machine instead of organisations that stand for an agenda and actually have the power to support them.
So you're telling me that there were no elections until Diebold made them practical?
Seems to me a touchscreen won't be of much help to people without limbs or who can't see.
Gee, for people who have any physical problem with a pen and paper setup we have notaries, or they bring a person whom they trust to fill it out for them. And for the immobile we have mobile elections committees.
When I open the link, Epiphany pops up a Window telling me
You should only accept the security information if you trust "www.thescogroup.com" and "www.sco.com".
no amount of technology will ever produce a voting system that all can use
Excuse me? Where I live we have this amazing technology:
a) A piece of paper printed with circles which are labeled with the name of the parties in big letters
b) A pen
c) An envelope
d) A ballot box
Any dork can use that and for those who can't, it's better when their votes are discarded
My altruistic side says "because we don't want to kill off any life that developed independant of earth"
My selfish side says "because what's the point in starting Mars exploration when contaminate the exploration site at the first try"
My common sense side says "duh, you don't trample in there like the bull in the china shop"
My paranoic side says "we'll never, ever be sure what we found there if we aren't absolutely sure to have kept the site clean (assuming we don't find more than bacteria)"
My TV junkie side has seen enough of Kirk and Archer to know how not to behave
There is, as of today
information is hard to keep secret
/.), I think we see its true meaning at work here: Information, due to its inherent properties, tends to spread, and needs active containment to keep it secret. These measures can and will fail at some point in time
Someone's gotta say it: Information wants to be free.
As misused as this sentence is (esp. on
So, you submitted the story yourself, yet after 3 replies at time of writing you are already slashdotted? Good work, dude :o)
McKinsey Global Institute is a US company.
McKinsey & Company is a global company with offices in Delhi and Mumbai just as in NYC
the root had no IP address
What's that supposed to mean?
As far as I am concerned, I just foresee that the land mine producers get out of the bad press. After all, producing/selling land mines has become a business no self-respecting weapons producer wanted to be caught in, with all the removal problems and maimed children and stuff. Now it's going to be perfectly respectable: "Got a little war? Need to protect a strip of land? Choose from our range of Poof! (tm) land mines. Easy removal after annoyance has stopped!" If the weapons companies are smart, they'll merge with biotech companies (if they haven't already) and can then sell both the mines and the weed. Reminds me of my pet peeve of food and pharma companies merging - you can first sell food that makes people sick, and then sell drugs against that, both genetically engineered to perfectly complement each other.
As much as I like to read /. as a way to gain insights into the way the American mind works (or at least the American mind of a subset of the polulation I can relate to), I am often annoyed at the capitalism flags that get waved in droves at every occasion. I find it highly entertaining how quickly people turn around and suddenly find capitalism Not So Good. Welcome in the real world, don't forget the lesson you learned
Uh, it's not Free Software?
Exactly
information wants to be free
/. and that says a lot.
This has to be the most frequently misrepresented utterance ever on
information wants to be free always only meant one thing: that to contain it, you need to spend energy, since left to it's own devices it's going to spread. And since if once out, you can only contain it again by shooting everyone who knows, it is only going to be better known. That's it, not more, not less
+2 Funny/Insightful. Thank you. I was actually a bit surprised that nobody else commented on that. I mean, Hank! Seems it's true that /. readers are too young
Thanks
Uh, could you please also say which is 20 and which is 4? Could be much more interesting that way :o) Thanks
Thanks, typo. I wonder if I got any language right at all. Are there /.ers in Tanzania, Kenya or the vicinity?
Whether German is far depends on where you start :)
Right, thanks for pointing that out