Remember: many people get their understanding of how computers work from what Microsoft says. By no longer offering the web-browser as a separate component, they start to chip away at the mentality that the browser CAN be one. By offering IE6 separately, they were kind of saying, "Yes, there's this thing called the 'operating system', but then there's a thing you can add on separately called a 'web browser' for viewing the 'internet'". Now they can change that to, "There IS no 'web browser', there is the 'operating system' only, and you don't mess with its deep secret parts." This would discourage people from even considering that IE could be replaced to begin with.
Word is a separate application that Microsoft can profit off from too. So no need to bundle it w/ Windows. But MS can't charge for IE anymore... they used that to kill of Netscape. But they still face technological competition which can undermine their goal of owning the internet. So why maintain the idea of it as a separate application? How many users today would consider the possibility that there could be any printing system other than the one built into Windows? Would you even think about swapping it out with one from a third-party, with its own drivers and everything, even if it was better? Probably not. That's what MS wants IE to become: a part that users don't dare touch, don't even think about touching. They want people to hear about alternate browsers and be like, "huh?". They're already making progress.
As a ruthless bunch of evil bastards, it's a move that makes a lot of sense. Hopefully we can counter it, though.
I've been using FreeBSD off and on since 2.2.2 or so. I officially replaced my primary home desktop with it over a year and an half ago. But even before that, and to this day, I run it for several servers I maintain.
The supported hardware is broader than the list suggests, because the list is mostly by chipsets. You'll find LOTS of different products that all use the same chipset. I've found that if you're unsure, just ask... people in the community will help you figure it out. I got a video-capture card for xmas that has worked like a charm. Watching TV in a box on my desktop is nice. I've watched DVDs, had no problems with my sound, get hardware-accel 3D on my video card, network card has always worked, as well as my wireless mouse. All the rest of my hardware besides the video-capture card is the same stuff I had when I ran Windows 2000 (which I bought without knowing I'd be ditching Windows for FreeBSD) and it all worked great when I switched.
The ports system kicks ass. Upgrading is a cinch. The OS is very stable. I'm happy.
Whether it be 1GB or 1TB, I think either way this is going to go the way of "unlimited internet access". A great idea to lure in customers, but eventually reality sets in, capacity problems arise, and the fine print is tweaked to the point where "1GB" doesn't really mean 1GB anymore.
Users, given the option to be lazy, will be lazy. The system can only sustain people never deleting email (plus the inevitable abuse) for so long.
Is it an nVidia problem, or a problem with your Linux distribution?
On FreeBSD:
cd/usr/ports/x11/nvidia-driver ; make clean install
Usually FreeBSD tends to be more "manual" than Linux, while Linux tends to be more pointy-and-clicky. I'm surprised they don't have the nVidia driver thing polished to be mindless.:(
You know what'd be cool? A joke trojan that used your scanner to play music.
There used to be a program that'd play a MIDI file on an HP ScanJet II by moving the motor at different speeds for different pitches. It was funny as hell. I wonder if that still exists anywhere, and would work with the new-fangled USB ScanJets...
I have two of these installed on some Canon ImageRunner eCopy stations for the employees to use, as they are nice and small and more or less "indestructable" as the name suggests.
So who would you have us vote for? Nader? (let's be realistic... he has no chance of winning).
Isn't this simply a self-fulfilling prediction, that goes agaist the whole concept of voting?
Seems to me that an attitude like that ensures that we never get out of the 2-party rut we're currently in. If you ever want change, you have to be willing to stand up for what you believe in, not just go along with what everyone else does because "everyone else does".
If you want Nader, stand up and be counted. Don't be defeatist... obviously Nader won't win if the majority of people who want him to don't even try.
(Disclaimer: I'm not necessarily pro-Nader... I'm speaking on matter of principle here)
Flatland = 90K Treasure Island = 174K Robin Hood = 159K Journey Into The Interior Of The Earth = 212K Hound of the Baskervilles = 144K Sleepy Hollow = 29K The Time Machine = 79K Around The World In 80 Days = 174K
all the BSD developers who freely allowed us to steal^H^H^H^H^Huse your code
If I give you a beer, you didn't steal it from me.
You know, it's rather bizarre... the Linux/GPL fanatics will scream endlessly in the war against SCO about how licensing lets the copyright-holder do whatever they please with their code, and if the copyright-holder wishes to give it out for free with a license like the GPL which says it has to always remain open-source then that's their god-given right by law. Isn't that the counter to SCO's claim that the GPL is illegal?
So listen: you can't have it both ways. If licensing lets the copyright-holder come up with whatever terms s/he wishes, then that includes the BSD license which the copyright-holder VOLUNTARILY used. The people who wrote FreeBSD gave it to the community under the terms of the BSD licenses so that things like what Apple did could SPECIFICALLY happen. In essence, FreeBSD freely gave itself to Apple.
How is that stealing? FreeBSD said "Feel free to use our code to make money however you want". Apple did just that. Give it a rest.
Case modder: metal is there to shield from RF interference. More metal you take away, more interference you spread out AND RECEIVE. Dell goes as far as to use metal mesh fabric tucked in tight around all the ports in the back. How much shielding do you think that big gaping plexiglass window (or clear-case) provides? ZERO. Sorry, last thing I want are all those traces on my motherboard to act as an antenna picking up stray RF and causing lockups, DATA LOSS
CPU overlocker: lower life-expectancy for CPU, higher-probability for corruption, lockups, and dataloss.
Graphic card overclocker: Same as CPU overclocker.
HD modder: data loss
I am a consumer. I am not a CPU/drive electronics engineer/specialist. I'm happy to accept the fact that the people making these know a HELL OF A LOT more about the technology than I do. I'd rather not risk my data (which I know a LOT about... particularly that it's valuable to me) by second-guessing them. Having a cool case that glows on the inside isn't worth a single additional lockup to me, because that lockup might be the one that blows away some critical work, and/or forces me to reinstall my OS.
I consider MacroVision to be contrary to copyright fair-use just like a lot of the other crap the MPAA pulls. It's not an issue for me, though... I use my TV as an S-video -> composite convertor (it has line-out) vs connecting my DVD player directly to my VCR, and it happens to do away with MacroVision in the process.:) No special box needed.
If I really bothered with tapes much I might consider getting a VCR with S-Video in and then a MacroVision mod for my DVD player. Actually I was thinking about that last part anyways as the same mod makes it region-free.
What PDA do you have? I have a Palm Tungsten T3 and I get about 4 hours, which is considered small, but certainly enough to watch a movie. If I needed more, I could always get the Palm Power-To-Go sled, which is the equivalent to +2.5 charges.
Same story, different day. It basically boils down to: what am I actually buying when I buy a CD/DVD/software/etc?
If I'm buying PHYSICAL PROPERTY, I can do whatever I want with it, including resell it once I'm done with it (something the software companies like to say we can't do). I should also be able to play the music/movie for anyone I wish, and let anyone I wish use the software.
If I'm buying a LICENSE, then I should be able to use my one LICENSE however I wish, independent of the media. If I'm getting a license to listen to the song, I should be able to transfer that song to another device so I can listen to it there too. I've paid the license... I'm allowed to listen. Same applies to movies.
Companies are trying to have it both ways, and refuse to pick which one it really is.
Note that one of the big issues the RIAA had was that digital media could be copied EXACTLY. They didn't have a problem with CD->tape apparently because the copy was degraded. Well guess what? When I make an MP3/OGG file, that's lossy compression... therefore the copy is also "degraded". Same goes if you mega-compress a DVD to fit on a 320x480 screen and a tiny 512MB SD card (I'm a Palm T3 owner).
I can understand that if I pay $5 for the VHS version, I might not be entitled to a license for the $30 SuperBit DVD version as well... but if I buy the DVD I sure as hell can make a VHS copy if I want to watch it at a friend's house who doesn't have a DVD player, or if I need to distill it down to fit on my PDA so I can watch it on the plane. Bite me, MPAA.
I disagree. I feel story is VERY important. Too many games are just rehashes of the same thing. You're driving/shooting/collecting objects and the only difference is the graphics.
Some of my favorite games from the past stood out because the storyline drew me into the world of the game and wouldn't let go. For a period of time, I was in the game, caught up in the story. Wing Commander (especially WC3... 4 CDs, shit), The 7th Guest, Ultima... and going back further: Planetfall, Witness...
Hmmm... a PDA designed to run a OS created by the biggest closed-source anti-GPL capitalistic monopoly in the world. which can only be programmed using a language created by the same said vendor, which caters to and encourages a similar mindset amongst developers. Many of whom are already used to the same sort of closed-source OS/tool/hardware lock-in on the desktop by same said vendor.
And you wonder why you're having trouble finding GPL programmers for it?:)
You might have better luck trying to sell the same idea to the Palm community. Not only do you already have a bunch of "anything-but-Microsoft" folks, but even the new development tools are based on the Eclipse open-source IDE. There are FAR more apps and developers out for Palm, many of them free.
No point in someone trying to exploit a bug in the source if it's of the original release and the hole has already been closed by a service pack. And since the service packs are binaries and not source diffs, it'd be pretty hard to bring the source current to find out what will really work currently.
One solution is to download and install the User Agent Switcher Extension. You can then have FireBird/Fox/Mozilla send the IE 6.0 User Agent string.
Except by doing this, you're casting your vote as "I am an IE user so no need to fix your website." instead of "I use a standards-based browser and my experience on your site sucked."
Webmasters DO use logs to see what percentage of their visitors are using what browsers, and this information is used to decide whether revamping the site to standards is worth it. By faking your UA string, you're skewing the stats against yourself, and are actually hurting your cause instead of helping. It's better to leave the UA alone and work with the site in other ways... this way you're investing in a long-term fix, not a short-term one.
Actually, it's the other way around: you can set a flag to have FreeBSD use a package (precompiled binary) if its available. I'm sure it's possible to set this to be the default, but it doesn't come set that way.
I'm not a programmer, but I think about the source code all the time.
First of all, it's great for slow connections. It's quicker to download source than binaries. Also, I don't like someone else deciding what compile-time options I want. Or compiling something for the lowest-common-denominator instead of letting my system compile it specifically to run best on my CPU, and linked to the proper library locations.
Then there are the packages compiled for GTK1 when I'd want GTK2, or compiled without anti-aliasing enabled when I personally want it (OO comes to mind). Or tons of other options. By compiling stuff myself, I get the software built the way *I* want.
Choice. It's the reason I switched to FreeBSD from Windows in the first place.
Whatever, troll. I've been running FreeBSD 5.2 on my desktop for a while now and have not had any problems. Also, 5.2 has not been withdrawn.
Re:I'm interested in BSD but...
on
BSD For Linux Users
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Typically, you don't have "Linux apps", exactly. What you tend to have are:
1) open-source applications 2) Linux binaries
99% of what you tend to use on a Linux system falls under #1. It's not a Linux application, specifically. It's source code that compiles under Linux... and probably other OSes as well. Maybe the authors only use Linux, and are like "Well, this is written for Red Hat, but if you want to make it work on a different OS, take the source and hack it up" (shame on them). Or maybe they're decent programmers and don't write to a specific operating system.
The end result is that some source will compile fine on another OS, some might need special compile-time or configure flags set, and some might need some patching. You can do it yourself... or you can use FreeBSD's ports, which takes care of everything for you. If something is in the ports system, someone has taken the time to go through all that, and include it into the install process. Whatever it takes... compile-time variables, patches, dependencies, etc... it's all downloaded, patched, built (in the proper order), installed, registered in the database, etc.
The beauty of ports extends beyond just installing the software. Every file can be associated with its port. Dependencies are all tracked automatically, and using the "portupgrade" package upgrading is insanely easy and automated.
By the way, Linux binaries (category 2 from above) aren't a problem either... FreeBSD includes a Linux emulation layer that allows you to run them if they aren't available to compile natively. Examples are RealPlayer and the Flash plugins (the 2 Linux binaries I use the most). In fact, there's a whole section of ports dedicated to Linux apps.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Mainstream? Like Forbes, BusinessWeek , Ziff-Davis (and here and here too), CBS News, USA Today, and most have heard of PC Magazine, plus a lot of papers like The Houston Chronicle, The Detroit News, the Syracuse Post-Standard, The Baltimore Sun, and the St. Louis Post-Standard. I have all those links plus others in a list I just send to people. I keep adding to it as I find more. Usually gets the message across that I'm not making stuff up.
Yeah, we pipe up every now and then. But the long uptimes give us lots of time to sleep or go on vacation. ;)
It might be a psychological thing too.
Remember: many people get their understanding of how computers work from what Microsoft says. By no longer offering the web-browser as a separate component, they start to chip away at the mentality that the browser CAN be one. By offering IE6 separately, they were kind of saying, "Yes, there's this thing called the 'operating system', but then there's a thing you can add on separately called a 'web browser' for viewing the 'internet'". Now they can change that to, "There IS no 'web browser', there is the 'operating system' only, and you don't mess with its deep secret parts." This would discourage people from even considering that IE could be replaced to begin with.
Word is a separate application that Microsoft can profit off from too. So no need to bundle it w/ Windows. But MS can't charge for IE anymore... they used that to kill of Netscape. But they still face technological competition which can undermine their goal of owning the internet. So why maintain the idea of it as a separate application? How many users today would consider the possibility that there could be any printing system other than the one built into Windows? Would you even think about swapping it out with one from a third-party, with its own drivers and everything, even if it was better? Probably not. That's what MS wants IE to become: a part that users don't dare touch, don't even think about touching. They want people to hear about alternate browsers and be like, "huh?". They're already making progress.
As a ruthless bunch of evil bastards, it's a move that makes a lot of sense. Hopefully we can counter it, though.
I have numerous friends who use FreeBSD, many because of me. More are coming. My webhost uses FreeBSD and the new one I'm switching to does as well. In fact, most of the sites with the longest uptime run FreeBSD or some *BSD.
The supported hardware is broader than the list suggests, because the list is mostly by chipsets. You'll find LOTS of different products that all use the same chipset. I've found that if you're unsure, just ask... people in the community will help you figure it out. I got a video-capture card for xmas that has worked like a charm. Watching TV in a box on my desktop is nice. I've watched DVDs, had no problems with my sound, get hardware-accel 3D on my video card, network card has always worked, as well as my wireless mouse. All the rest of my hardware besides the video-capture card is the same stuff I had when I ran Windows 2000 (which I bought without knowing I'd be ditching Windows for FreeBSD) and it all worked great when I switched. The ports system kicks ass. Upgrading is a cinch. The OS is very stable. I'm happy.
Whether it be 1GB or 1TB, I think either way this is going to go the way of "unlimited internet access". A great idea to lure in customers, but eventually reality sets in, capacity problems arise, and the fine print is tweaked to the point where "1GB" doesn't really mean 1GB anymore.
Users, given the option to be lazy, will be lazy. The system can only sustain people never deleting email (plus the inevitable abuse) for so long.
Is it an nVidia problem, or a problem with your Linux distribution?
/usr/ports/x11/nvidia-driver ; make clean install
:(
On FreeBSD:
cd
Usually FreeBSD tends to be more "manual" than Linux, while Linux tends to be more pointy-and-clicky. I'm surprised they don't have the nVidia driver thing polished to be mindless.
You know what'd be cool? A joke trojan that used your scanner to play music.
There used to be a program that'd play a MIDI file on an HP ScanJet II by moving the motor at different speeds for different pitches. It was funny as hell. I wonder if that still exists anywhere, and would work with the new-fangled USB ScanJets...
I'd like to know why no one has come up with a decent, washable keyboard.
Actually, they have.
I have two of these installed on some Canon ImageRunner eCopy stations for the employees to use, as they are nice and small and more or less "indestructable" as the name suggests.
So who would you have us vote for? Nader? (let's be realistic... he has no chance of winning).
Isn't this simply a self-fulfilling prediction, that goes agaist the whole concept of voting?
Seems to me that an attitude like that ensures that we never get out of the 2-party rut we're currently in. If you ever want change, you have to be willing to stand up for what you believe in, not just go along with what everyone else does because "everyone else does".
If you want Nader, stand up and be counted. Don't be defeatist... obviously Nader won't win if the majority of people who want him to don't even try.
(Disclaimer: I'm not necessarily pro-Nader... I'm speaking on matter of principle here)
Here's what I have on my Palm (in Pucker format):
Flatland = 90K
Treasure Island = 174K
Robin Hood = 159K
Journey Into The Interior Of The Earth = 212K
Hound of the Baskervilles = 144K
Sleepy Hollow = 29K
The Time Machine = 79K
Around The World In 80 Days = 174K
all the BSD developers who freely allowed us to steal^H^H^H^H^Huse your code
If I give you a beer, you didn't steal it from me.
You know, it's rather bizarre... the Linux/GPL fanatics will scream endlessly in the war against SCO about how licensing lets the copyright-holder do whatever they please with their code, and if the copyright-holder wishes to give it out for free with a license like the GPL which says it has to always remain open-source then that's their god-given right by law. Isn't that the counter to SCO's claim that the GPL is illegal?
So listen: you can't have it both ways. If licensing lets the copyright-holder come up with whatever terms s/he wishes, then that includes the BSD license which the copyright-holder VOLUNTARILY used. The people who wrote FreeBSD gave it to the community under the terms of the BSD licenses so that things like what Apple did could SPECIFICALLY happen. In essence, FreeBSD freely gave itself to Apple.
How is that stealing? FreeBSD said "Feel free to use our code to make money however you want". Apple did just that. Give it a rest.
Hmm.
Case modder: metal is there to shield from RF interference. More metal you take away, more interference you spread out AND RECEIVE. Dell goes as far as to use metal mesh fabric tucked in tight around all the ports in the back. How much shielding do you think that big gaping plexiglass window (or clear-case) provides? ZERO. Sorry, last thing I want are all those traces on my motherboard to act as an antenna picking up stray RF and causing lockups, DATA LOSS
CPU overlocker: lower life-expectancy for CPU, higher-probability for corruption, lockups, and dataloss.
Graphic card overclocker: Same as CPU overclocker.
HD modder: data loss
I am a consumer. I am not a CPU/drive electronics engineer/specialist. I'm happy to accept the fact that the people making these know a HELL OF A LOT more about the technology than I do. I'd rather not risk my data (which I know a LOT about... particularly that it's valuable to me) by second-guessing them. Having a cool case that glows on the inside isn't worth a single additional lockup to me, because that lockup might be the one that blows away some critical work, and/or forces me to reinstall my OS.
I consider MacroVision to be contrary to copyright fair-use just like a lot of the other crap the MPAA pulls. It's not an issue for me, though... I use my TV as an S-video -> composite convertor (it has line-out) vs connecting my DVD player directly to my VCR, and it happens to do away with MacroVision in the process. :) No special box needed.
If I really bothered with tapes much I might consider getting a VCR with S-Video in and then a MacroVision mod for my DVD player. Actually I was thinking about that last part anyways as the same mod makes it region-free.
What PDA do you have? I have a Palm Tungsten T3 and I get about 4 hours, which is considered small, but certainly enough to watch a movie. If I needed more, I could always get the Palm Power-To-Go sled, which is the equivalent to +2.5 charges.
Same story, different day. It basically boils down to: what am I actually buying when I buy a CD/DVD/software/etc?
If I'm buying PHYSICAL PROPERTY, I can do whatever I want with it, including resell it once I'm done with it (something the software companies like to say we can't do). I should also be able to play the music/movie for anyone I wish, and let anyone I wish use the software.
If I'm buying a LICENSE, then I should be able to use my one LICENSE however I wish, independent of the media. If I'm getting a license to listen to the song, I should be able to transfer that song to another device so I can listen to it there too. I've paid the license... I'm allowed to listen. Same applies to movies.
Companies are trying to have it both ways, and refuse to pick which one it really is.
Note that one of the big issues the RIAA had was that digital media could be copied EXACTLY. They didn't have a problem with CD->tape apparently because the copy was degraded. Well guess what? When I make an MP3/OGG file, that's lossy compression... therefore the copy is also "degraded". Same goes if you mega-compress a DVD to fit on a 320x480 screen and a tiny 512MB SD card (I'm a Palm T3 owner).
I can understand that if I pay $5 for the VHS version, I might not be entitled to a license for the $30 SuperBit DVD version as well... but if I buy the DVD I sure as hell can make a VHS copy if I want to watch it at a friend's house who doesn't have a DVD player, or if I need to distill it down to fit on my PDA so I can watch it on the plane. Bite me, MPAA.
I disagree. I feel story is VERY important. Too many games are just rehashes of the same thing. You're driving/shooting/collecting objects and the only difference is the graphics.
Some of my favorite games from the past stood out because the storyline drew me into the world of the game and wouldn't let go. For a period of time, I was in the game, caught up in the story. Wing Commander (especially WC3... 4 CDs, shit), The 7th Guest, Ultima... and going back further: Planetfall, Witness...
Umm, no.
:(
"All your outsourced games are belong to us!"
And you wonder why you're having trouble finding GPL programmers for it? :)
You might have better luck trying to sell the same idea to the Palm community. Not only do you already have a bunch of "anything-but-Microsoft" folks, but even the new development tools are based on the Eclipse open-source IDE. There are FAR more apps and developers out for Palm, many of them free.
I wonder what service pack these are of?
No point in someone trying to exploit a bug in the source if it's of the original release and the hole has already been closed by a service pack. And since the service packs are binaries and not source diffs, it'd be pretty hard to bring the source current to find out what will really work currently.
Except by doing this, you're casting your vote as "I am an IE user so no need to fix your website." instead of "I use a standards-based browser and my experience on your site sucked." Webmasters DO use logs to see what percentage of their visitors are using what browsers, and this information is used to decide whether revamping the site to standards is worth it. By faking your UA string, you're skewing the stats against yourself, and are actually hurting your cause instead of helping. It's better to leave the UA alone and work with the site in other ways... this way you're investing in a long-term fix, not a short-term one.
Actually, it's the other way around: you can set a flag to have FreeBSD use a package (precompiled binary) if its available. I'm sure it's possible to set this to be the default, but it doesn't come set that way.
I'm not a programmer, but I think about the source code all the time.
First of all, it's great for slow connections. It's quicker to download source than binaries. Also, I don't like someone else deciding what compile-time options I want. Or compiling something for the lowest-common-denominator instead of letting my system compile it specifically to run best on my CPU, and linked to the proper library locations.
Then there are the packages compiled for GTK1 when I'd want GTK2, or compiled without anti-aliasing enabled when I personally want it (OO comes to mind). Or tons of other options. By compiling stuff myself, I get the software built the way *I* want.
Choice. It's the reason I switched to FreeBSD from Windows in the first place.
Whatever, troll. I've been running FreeBSD 5.2 on my desktop for a while now and have not had any problems. Also, 5.2 has not been withdrawn.
Typically, you don't have "Linux apps", exactly. What you tend to have are:
:)
1) open-source applications
2) Linux binaries
99% of what you tend to use on a Linux system falls under #1. It's not a Linux application, specifically. It's source code that compiles under Linux... and probably other OSes as well. Maybe the authors only use Linux, and are like "Well, this is written for Red Hat, but if you want to make it work on a different OS, take the source and hack it up" (shame on them). Or maybe they're decent programmers and don't write to a specific operating system.
The end result is that some source will compile fine on another OS, some might need special compile-time or configure flags set, and some might need some patching. You can do it yourself... or you can use FreeBSD's ports, which takes care of everything for you. If something is in the ports system, someone has taken the time to go through all that, and include it into the install process. Whatever it takes... compile-time variables, patches, dependencies, etc... it's all downloaded, patched, built (in the proper order), installed, registered in the database, etc.
The beauty of ports extends beyond just installing the software. Every file can be associated with its port. Dependencies are all tracked automatically, and using the "portupgrade" package upgrading is insanely easy and automated.
By the way, Linux binaries (category 2 from above) aren't a problem either... FreeBSD includes a Linux emulation layer that allows you to run them if they aren't available to compile natively. Examples are RealPlayer and the Flash plugins (the 2 Linux binaries I use the most). In fact, there's a whole section of ports dedicated to Linux apps.
There is indeed such a thing: kldload