I just don't get GNOME these days. Every release seems to be slower, buggier and with less features than the one before. I don't know how deep Sun's involvement is, but it segfaults so much on Solaris that a less charitable person might call it unusable. KDE, on the other hand, is rock solid.
I've often wondered why this hasn't happened. It's just what the world needs. Yes, some data (read pr0n and mp3s) would be lost, but it would teach a lot of valuable lessons - lessons which must be learned somewhere along the line. Keep backups. Use a firewall. Keep up-to-date with patches. Don't trust *anyone*. DON'T USE WINDOWS!
Something simple, like writing big random blocks of data all over the disk would be enough. (Got to defeat those pesky undelete tools.) Screw the bootblock, hose the VTOC (or whatever Windows calls it). Go hog wild. The only limits are the limits of j00r imagination.
Come on kids, one of you must be up to the job! Okay, so if you get caught you might get a bit of time, but you'll be WORLD FAMOUS! Teh most pheared haX0r on teh planet!
This is only redundant in that what the poster says should be blindingly obvious to anyone smart enough to turn on a computer and navigate to slashdot.
i) DMCA doesn't really limit your freedom does it? Draconian "homeland security" laws limit your freedom. Your government's paranoia limits your freedom. Go and tell people in Burma how the DMCA limits your freedom.
ii) How can MS hold back an entire industry when your OSS people are free to innovate all they want?
iii) fair point. But I feel you are being a little naive if you don't believe Kerry will be *almost* as subservient to big business as Bush.
Linux does *not* preserve my freedom. If linux disappeared tomorrow, the world would not blink. 95% of the world's population have never heard of it, and if someone told them about it, they wouldn't care. IT'S JUST A COMPUTER PROGRAM and it WILL NOT change the world.
And another thing: IBM and Sun are pretty big businesses, and they support OSS.
this has to be the single most unimportant issue in world politics today. I really struggle to believe that anyone would read anything into, or make any kind of an issue over what webserver hosts a politician's website.
What's the reasoning here? "Kerry's webserver runs teh linux, so if he wins he will destroy MS and the world will be happy and live as one with no more wars or fighting."
Especially when most of the options are rubbish. I must have tried a hundred Unix e-mail clients over the years, and maybe two of them are any good. There's *way* too much crap bundled with most distributions IMHO. (And increasingly with commercial Unixes.)
I don't think you can win here. I don't like to force my readers to use a narrow band down the middle of their screen (it often looks awful), but I certainly don't want to put them off by presenting them with lines so long that they're difficult to read.
TeX uses wide margins for a reason, and, as usual, TeX is right. (One more reason why word processors suck - they give users 1 inch margins by default and the users don't change them, so A4/letter sheets have loooooong, tiring, hard to read lines. It's a rare joy today to get a properly typeset document.)
Everyone knows that Debian systems run rather old packages. (Those out-of-date Debian jokes are almost as fresh and funny as the *hilarious* gentoo compilation gags.)
But why? What does Debian actually *do* with the tarballs the rest of us download?
Tons of testing? Major modifications? Ultimately, is the time they take time well spent?
There never will be a version 3. Sun decided that the kind of change that might warrant a major version number change (e.g. BSD to SYSV, a.out to ELF) would not happen again, rather making the 2. redundant. (I guess if they ever make a brand new OS it would have to be Something 1.0.)
All the linux people complaining that the SunOS or Java versioning is too complicated should have a look at their own system. Scores of linux distributions, all with their own different, completely arbitrary versioning schemes. Dig deeper and the user encountners the joys of incompatibilities between distribution, kernel version, glibc version, libstdc++ version...
It has good marketing now, but wouldn't it have been a success anyway? I remember seeing the first announcement of the iPod and thinking how much I wanted one - I'd have happily bought a Mac if that was the only way to get one to work.
The difference I see between this and the iPod is that people want, and are used to having, music while on the move. I play my iPod everywhere. I can listen to music when I'm doing pretty much anything, but I can't watch movies in anywhere near so many situations. Portable movie players do nothing for me at all. I think it's catering to a market that doesn't exist.
You can perform pretty much all the same tasks on pretty much any modern operating system with pretty much the same degree of efficiency and reliability.
But isn't this thing just so freakin cool? Reminds me why I used to get so excited about space type stuff. (Before the astrophysics degree knocked it all out of me.)
It's been called (colloquially at least) X-windows for as long as I can remember. You know, Unix, and much of what makes up your leet gentoo boxen existed long before linux came along.
I do just want to say that as of 0.9 Firefox is freakin awesome (I had problems with it before), especially when kitted out with adblock and singlewindow and whatever other extension floats your boat.
I think the abundance of extensions show how many capable and creative developers there are outside the cosy little Linux/Slashdot/sourceforge community. If Firefox only ran on Linux, how many extensions do you think there would be? I'm betting not many. There's a whole world full of Windows/Mac/Whatever developers just waiting to contribute to something cool that runs on their OS. We should all be trying to be as cross-platform as possible, but half of us are writing code which won't even compile if it can't include "linux/sys.h". (BSD? Solaris? Never heard of 'em. Don't even want to.)
When I started this post I thought I'd get modded up for being a fanboy, now I'll probably get modded down for being "anti linux". Cool!
I have both Spice Girls albums *on vinyl*! (How cool am I?) I love them both (especially Spiceworld), I like Spiceworld the Movie (which I went to see twice) and I AM NOT ASHAMED! I just regret never seeing them live.
If you're a crusty old Unix bod, it's the only way to go. Install the core and build the rest on top yourself. Just the way you want it. No crap. No package dependencies. No depending on the distribution vendor. You know what you're doing. Slack just lets you do it. It also seems to be the lowest profile, least "political" of the established distributions, which I like.
My old laptop disk gave up the ghost a little while ago. It had the latest and greatest everything installed, but I think the core of it had come from a Slackware 3.2 CD I got with a book back in the day. Every single part of it had been replaced, but deep down, it was still Slack 3.2. In a way. I downloaded ISOs for later versions, but there was no point upgrading. My new laptop disk has OpenBSD on it. I might just jump back to Slackware, for old time's sake.
Slashdot Mirror
Come on mods, you know you want to!
It's not a troll if it's true. Is it?
I just don't get GNOME these days. Every release seems to be slower, buggier and with less features than the one before. I don't know how deep Sun's involvement is, but it segfaults so much on Solaris that a less charitable person might call it unusable. KDE, on the other hand, is rock solid.
What happened to you GNOME? YOU USED TO BE COOL!
I've often wondered why this hasn't happened. It's just what the world needs. Yes, some data (read pr0n and mp3s) would be lost, but it would teach a lot of valuable lessons - lessons which must be learned somewhere along the line. Keep backups. Use a firewall. Keep up-to-date with patches. Don't trust *anyone*. DON'T USE WINDOWS!
Something simple, like writing big random blocks of data all over the disk would be enough. (Got to defeat those pesky undelete tools.) Screw the bootblock, hose the VTOC (or whatever Windows calls it). Go hog wild. The only limits are the limits of j00r imagination.
Come on kids, one of you must be up to the job! Okay, so if you get caught you might get a bit of time, but you'll be WORLD FAMOUS! Teh most pheared haX0r on teh planet!
Also been seeing lots of those "MS Security Update" mails too. Anyone know if the two are related?
This is only redundant in that what the poster says should be blindingly obvious to anyone smart enough to turn on a computer and navigate to slashdot.
i) DMCA doesn't really limit your freedom does it? Draconian "homeland security" laws limit your freedom. Your government's paranoia limits your freedom. Go and tell people in Burma how the DMCA limits your freedom.
ii) How can MS hold back an entire industry when your OSS people are free to innovate all they want?
iii) fair point. But I feel you are being a little naive if you don't believe Kerry will be *almost* as subservient to big business as Bush.
Linux does *not* preserve my freedom. If linux disappeared tomorrow, the world would not blink. 95% of the world's population have never heard of it, and if someone told them about it, they wouldn't care. IT'S JUST A COMPUTER PROGRAM and it WILL NOT change the world.
And another thing: IBM and Sun are pretty big businesses, and they support OSS.
He's a libertarian. He can use whatever he likes.
this has to be the single most unimportant issue in world politics today. I really struggle to believe that anyone would read anything into, or make any kind of an issue over what webserver hosts a politician's website.
What's the reasoning here? "Kerry's webserver runs teh linux, so if he wins he will destroy MS and the world will be happy and live as one with no more wars or fighting."
Especially when most of the options are rubbish. I must have tried a hundred Unix e-mail clients over the years, and maybe two of them are any good. There's *way* too much crap bundled with most distributions IMHO. (And increasingly with commercial Unixes.)
What OS does that actually work on?
I don't think you can win here. I don't like to force my readers to use a narrow band down the middle of their screen (it often looks awful), but I certainly don't want to put them off by presenting them with lines so long that they're difficult to read.
TeX uses wide margins for a reason, and, as usual, TeX is right. (One more reason why word processors suck - they give users 1 inch margins by default and the users don't change them, so A4/letter sheets have loooooong, tiring, hard to read lines. It's a rare joy today to get a properly typeset document.)
Everyone knows that Debian systems run rather old packages. (Those out-of-date Debian jokes are almost as fresh and funny as the *hilarious* gentoo compilation gags.)
But why? What does Debian actually *do* with the tarballs the rest of us download?
Tons of testing? Major modifications? Ultimately, is the time they take time well spent?
Just curious, that's all.
There never will be a version 3. Sun decided that the kind of change that might warrant a major version number change (e.g. BSD to SYSV, a.out to ELF) would not happen again, rather making the 2. redundant. (I guess if they ever make a brand new OS it would have to be Something 1.0.)
All the linux people complaining that the SunOS or Java versioning is too complicated should have a look at their own system. Scores of linux distributions, all with their own different, completely arbitrary versioning schemes. Dig deeper and the user encountners the joys of incompatibilities between distribution, kernel version, glibc version, libstdc++ version...
It has good marketing now, but wouldn't it have been a success anyway? I remember seeing the first announcement of the iPod and thinking how much I wanted one - I'd have happily bought a Mac if that was the only way to get one to work.
The difference I see between this and the iPod is that people want, and are used to having, music while on the move. I play my iPod everywhere. I can listen to music when I'm doing pretty much anything, but I can't watch movies in anywhere near so many situations. Portable movie players do nothing for me at all. I think it's catering to a market that doesn't exist.
You can perform pretty much all the same tasks on pretty much any modern operating system with pretty much the same degree of efficiency and reliability.
But isn't this thing just so freakin cool? Reminds me why I used to get so excited about space type stuff. (Before the astrophysics degree knocked it all out of me.)
It's been called (colloquially at least) X-windows for as long as I can remember. You know, Unix, and much of what makes up your leet gentoo boxen existed long before linux came along.
> Could this be argued as a violation of 8th ammendment rights?
In the US and UK, all your reasonable civil rights are being removed, piece by piece.
Yes, it should be part of the core functionality.
I do just want to say that as of 0.9 Firefox is freakin awesome (I had problems with it before), especially when kitted out with adblock and singlewindow and whatever other extension floats your boat.
I think the abundance of extensions show how many capable and creative developers there are outside the cosy little Linux/Slashdot/sourceforge community. If Firefox only ran on Linux, how many extensions do you think there would be? I'm betting not many. There's a whole world full of Windows/Mac/Whatever developers just waiting to contribute to something cool that runs on their OS. We should all be trying to be as cross-platform as possible, but half of us are writing code which won't even compile if it can't include "linux/sys.h". (BSD? Solaris? Never heard of 'em. Don't even want to.)
When I started this post I thought I'd get modded up for being a fanboy, now I'll probably get modded down for being "anti linux". Cool!
to make a *FOUR* dimensional desktop. Who's with me?
I have both Spice Girls albums *on vinyl*! (How cool am I?) I love them both (especially Spiceworld), I like Spiceworld the Movie (which I went to see twice) and I AM NOT ASHAMED! I just regret never seeing them live.
I'll send you 1Gb of goatse jpegs, and you see what you can gzip those down to.
If you're a crusty old Unix bod, it's the only way to go. Install the core and build the rest on top yourself. Just the way you want it. No crap. No package dependencies. No depending on the distribution vendor. You know what you're doing. Slack just lets you do it. It also seems to be the lowest profile, least "political" of the established distributions, which I like.
My old laptop disk gave up the ghost a little while ago. It had the latest and greatest everything installed, but I think the core of it had come from a Slackware 3.2 CD I got with a book back in the day. Every single part of it had been replaced, but deep down, it was still Slack 3.2. In a way. I downloaded ISOs for later versions, but there was no point upgrading. My new laptop disk has OpenBSD on it. I might just jump back to Slackware, for old time's sake.
It works with other Unixes.