It's funny to see that some companies are using Wine/Cider more and more. The Mac version of Spore, for example, really isn't a Mac version at all, it's the Windows version wrapped up in Wine/Cider. It's smart for companies to choose to use libraries which are cross-platform, so right now Wine is providing that. Of course you can run Linux programs on Windows because Linux libraries are also cross-platform to my knowledge, so hopefully what things will evolve into is a battle among cross-platform libraries, making the OS not matter. Once that starts happening more, hoping it will continue, more and more programs will be cross-platform, then who will be out in the cold? I know, how about the company charging $300 for Vista Ultimate. So yeah, that would be nice to see happen. Cross-platformness and cross-distroness everything FTW.
No doubt about their abuse, and IMO there should be a LOT more lawsuits against them, but the poster is definitely right in that Microsoft has actually invested a little bit of bought-out ideas into some of their software due to competition from Apple, Linux, and OSS in general. IE would not be as less-sucky-than-it-was if it weren't for Firefox and other OSS.
Thank you. "Durrrr I use Linux but I hate Linux software being usable! I don't want any more Linux software, vi is all I need!" Yeah, ok you go away and create some program that only you know how to use, so the rest of us can help push Linux software development by making it more usable and easier to access so that us as well as others can use it, attracting more to the platform and allowing even more software development/use to occur.
I just don't understand how anyone could purposefully want to shoot themselves like that, it's the most selfish asinine lacking-in-common-sense thing I've ever heard.
Because you use Linux, you need to realize that what you are using is community-driven software. If there are no longer communities to drive that software, that software won't exist, or at least won't progress anymore, depending. So, if you're a Linux user, you should always care about it's uptake as it directly effects you, whether you like that fact or not. If Linux had 90% desktop share, right now today, Linux software would be in much better shape than it is and there would be many many more programs for Linux. You like programs, don't you? That's what I thought.
Or quite simply put, the parent is a fucking idiot. I'm sorry but preaching that less Linux use is a good thing when you yourself use it is contrary to all economic, social, and common sense thought. If you're using Linux just because it's a niche OS, you badly need to re-diagnose your life. And for anyone even thinking about making the argument that using something that is less popular is good just because there are less viruses is full of it too, because obscurity is not good security even if it may help in the short run.
Oh geez sure, Flash-only sites are horrible for normal navigation, though I'm sure they'll work to get browsing navigation buttons working with flash-only sites, just a matter of time. Same with the default font size, I'll bet Flash will find a way to communicate with the browser or desktop for the default font sizes, though IMO full-page zooming is much better than changing default font sizes for a web browser. No clue why Firefox doesn't have a changeable default zoom level for websites, instead it only remembers any changes to specific website zoom levels, which is just half of the solution.
Any way, that wasn't what I was asking. I know SVG, and it's not an animation format. I'm asking for a web animation rendering format. While I agree that SVG static rendering should also be a part of basic HTML standards, what was needed was SVG animation control standards. IMO, you should be able to make a website and say create circle in this area and move it to this location over this period of time, or whatever, so that shape/SVG manipulation is easily possible through basic web standards. This is so basic and simple that I just don't understand why no one has done anything like that, why in the hell does it seem like Flash is the only implementation of SVG animation? Just seems crazy to me.
It may be the player, it may be the driver, not sure, but of course now I can't find tearing on one thing I try so...:P
Compiz is something that I don't think I've never not seen tearing on. Try moving a window around with wobbly windows on and you should see tearing. Obviously this will be a little harder to spot on higher end cards.
If binaries aren't modular like they should be, then clearly someone didn't list their dependencies correctly, or someone found a problem with one of the libraries which should then be ironed out. All libraries should have clear, solid APIs which have room for expansion. I think you're confusing "binary blobs", what is meant by that is a blob of something in which you cannot touch, which is up to some closed company to maintain so it can't be easily worked on by whoever is complaining about it because they don't have the source code to look at. So, they are complaining about closed source software, not binaries. Everything you run is a binary, and probably 99% of all software that is ever downloaded is in binary. Users should never have to compile a kernel or OpenOffice or X unless they want to, and if you demand that from them Linux will never overtake Windows and Mac, and that's something I want to happen and I'm going to help it happen, so no, telling everyone to compile is never acceptable unless someone wants to.
Yes but you know as well as I do that Satan is definitely not limited to "challenging religious faith", there's a lot more than that. Satan is defined in many different places so if you take all of those definitions as true then he's definitely an asshole. But, yes, if you want to have a religion which believes in the good parts about Satan...or...well, the good part at least about questioning "faith", haha, then whatever, but that's a pretty hypocritical "religion" to believe in. If you believe religious faith should be challenged then believing in Satan is pretty dumb unless it's meant to be sarcasm like the flying spaghetti monster.
"I simply don't think open source CAN develop a first class desktop experience."
While I agree that certain things like GTK vs. QT could use some streamlining so that, for instance, the user was in almost total control over the way their programs look and feel, just because some developers choose not to develop for desktop standards doesn't mean the end of the world. Users do have the choice on the programs they use, so if there's some program like Blender which doesn't use, nor do I think it has the option to use (but could be wrong, someone might have made something by now) a more standard GUI interface which they can control the theme on doesn't mean the whole Linux desktop experience is destroyed. They can simply not use that program. That's one of the differences between OSX/Windows and the free desktops is developers have the option to make their own interface. So, I agree that users should be in charge of their GUIs and developers need to give that control over to their users as to whether they want to use the developer's interface which they think is better, or their own one, though in any case it should be at least color theme-able! So, basically, more Linux modularity goodness, please, not "standardization" in the sense of removing choice, but modularity in the sense of giving more freedom to everyone, and that's the way things are heading. More developers are realizing that users + more freedom = bigger user base, while other developers just don't care, but that's OK because no one has to use their program.
So, I think it's definitely moving in that direction but certainly needs improvement and more modularity/planning on the behalf of developers, and I think more constructive criticism is definitely good and needed, but it's definitely not impossible for Linux to get a thousand programs under it's belt which are seemless, because it's happening and will continue to happen, thanks in part to efforts like freedesktop.org and the Linux Foundation, though I keep wondering if the latter's methods for unifying is the correct path (trying to push standardization more than modularity and simply smart programming).
I don't understand how you can defend ALSA by admitting its such a bad audio API that it had to be brushed under the rug by hiding it under a bastardized API like Pulse.
Oh I'm definitely not defending it, I'm merely suggesting another API to you and was wondering why the attack when PA exists, which happens to be becoming more common it seems like, so perhaps it's worth taking a look at. I fully agree there should be a/some APIs which are completely separate from the sound servers so that we can get some more modularity there for situations like you mentioned if they don't have Pulse Audio installed (though it should then be a dependency and the user should be able to easily install and run it of course). If we can get a good Linux audio API in there, that will free up the programming nightmare and allow that freedom to swap out and drop in any sound server you want, creating more competition between the sound servers because there will actually be choice. Like you said, you won't be forced to develop for or not develop for a particular sound API based on it's popularity. Again for the love of all things that are awesome, more modularity please. More developers need to realize the importance of design modularity. If I were making a program that used sound, and was told that I needed to pick one of the sound servers and develop for it specifically and there was no cross-server API I could use to quickly and easily let the user decide the sound server they thought was best aside from programming for every one that I thought might be common, I'd work on making the fucking thing, not whining about how it didn't exist. It hopefully shouldn't be too hard to do, because APIs are or should be quite small, being a simple "wrapper" or universal interface to whatever backend. Sure, I'd have to then program for all of the most common s
Though tearing also plagues Linux, I haven't seen a video card/driver setup yet which doesn't have tearing unless some of the latest Intel or ATI drivers have fixed it. I'm glad that the Intel, X, and other devs/users have brought it up, hopefully soon it'll be a thing of the past.
That's just Ubuntu. Not that it matters, I just want the number of Linux users to go higher regardless of what the actual number is right now.
I imagine the number is shrinking in the face of the fact that OSX is so well done.
You think an OS with a pre-loaded dock which is still tied to overpriced hardware should be outdoing a completely free OS which can have a dock as well as a hundred number of other ways of starting programs? I agree that certain things need better streamlining on Linux believe me, but I don't agree with your statement if only Linux had actual consumer choice behind it and visibility. Even though it may sound cliche that doesn't mean it's not true, I largely blame Microsoft's business practices for this. I think many consumers would choose the much cheaper Linux option, if they had the choice presented. I just disagree on that one point, but appreciate your criticism.
About ALSA though, I still don't understand why it's getting so much hate when Pulseaudio has been adopted by many of the "biggest" distros and is available of course for anyone to install. From Wikipedia: In a typical installation scenario under Linux, the user configures ALSA to use a virtual device provided by PulseAudio. Thus, applications using ALSA will output sound to PulseAudio, which then uses ALSA itself to access the real sound card. PulseAudio also provides its own native interface to applications that want to support PulseAudio directly, as well as a legacy interface for ESD applications, making it suitable as a drop-in replacement for ESD. So, perhaps you should take a look at PA's API then. ^^ Would be nice to have a few standardized audio APIs though which could be used with any sound server, but for now the sound servers are the ones being flexible and modular by being able to communicate with all these different APIs, like PA can, so that's better than nothing.
What exactly is one of the best "flash alternatives" currently? Still can't fathom why vector graphics manipulation isn't part of HTML "1.0" since flash was around back then.:P
(Yes, I know how to worship the googly, but asking is more fun.)
I think most developers are interested in usability but some don't know how to best go about it. For instance one thing that bugs me that you mention is QT vs. GTK. What is needed is a system that is more modular so that developers don't need to split their effort between the two, slowing down progress. What's needed is a standardized API for GUI programs which can then be used by either of these libraries, so any program will look like a native, or close to native, KDE or Gnome program depending on which one you have loaded, or on user preferences, etc.
Whatever it takes to unify Linux more to streamline it more and get things moving forward faster will be a major help. It's those kinds of things that few talk about but which can really make a difference. Of course there are already several great examples where this has happened but there is certainly room for improvement.
While I'm on a rant I'll mention my usual bitching about Linux packaging urgently needing attention, too, so developers can finally make a package that can be used on any distro, and the Linux user base can really expand when some of them aren't forced to use the command line to compile to get certain programs, not to mention pick distros (software bundles) regardless of the particular size of their repos.
I'm looking forward to the day when which distro is installed on a system isn't really important, all that is important is that it's Linux, because any and all Linux software will still be easily available. That's true freedom. (Don't let anyone tell you it's impossible, either, as modularity is always possible.)
The OP is talking about being able to install any Linux software easily, not just DEB packages. This is entirely possible, but because either the formats are full of fail, or the package managers are, or something, no one could make at least SOME manager compatible with most of the most popular package formats, or no one could make one package format which could be used by any of the managers. This is beyond retarded, there's no reason for it other than possibly the greed of bigger distros wanting the size of their repos to be one of the factors for attracting users, and needs to be quickly overcome. This is the kind of stupid fragmentation that doesn't make sense that Linux does not need right now. See my reply to the OP for links and more information.
A package manager should be as easy to use as an archive manager. Want to install some new software that came out in some new package format? Just install a plugin, or an updated version of your manager, and you're on your way. That's how Linux packaging should be.
Yes, it should be, and you shouldn't have to look for DEB packages if you're on a Linux distro using a deb-only package manager or a RPM if you're on one using a RPM-only manager. All package managers should be made compatible with at least one format(preferably more) so Linux software installation is simple, instead of Linux users having to hit website after website of software where the developers never bothered to release some kind of binary because of this mess, or they release a binary which isn't a normal package, and even if it does it doesn't contain the information inside it for a URL for automatic updates. Instead us Linux users often have to deal with out-of-date software because we're stuck waiting on our distro maintainer to specially package everything under the sun we could ever want, which is impossible, and which gives certain larger distros an unfair advantage. Or, we have to compile it, which limits the numbers of Linux users greatly because obviously normal users don't know how and most users don't want to bother with doing it even if they do know. So, yeah, I'd say it was a big problem.
Can read why Linux software installation sucks part one and two, and read about two projects hoping to make it better in the future.
Right, just because you have the freedom to speak your ideas doesn't mean everyone has to listen to them, and while there are disturbing/mean things in both Christian and Muslim religions, there's really nothing nice about Satan, which was the original point of his invention I'm sure, and that's enough of a reason for a site to want to ignore such a distro.
Besides, packaging some GDM themes, desktop themes, and wallpaper and calling it a distro is pretty lame since anyone can easily install themes anyway, not that having the theme you want being default isn't a nice touch, if a small one.
You just keep right on thinking that anything I say must be wrong because I must be just a fanboy, but I know that there is such a thing as the abuse of powers of monopolies, and that MS and other companies have done things that are hurtful to consumer's choice. I will never say there are no problems with Linux, that would obviously be insane to say, but I can very easily argue that Linux and other operating systems would be in a much better place right now if it wasn't for the abuse of power by monopolies. The fact is, you can make it easy for competition to occur, or you can make it hard, and any other operating system besides Windows has had life made extremely difficult for them because of Microsoft, and I don't think many of the things that they've done to cause that are legal, or should be considered legal.
Like I said, I don't know when or if ever a Linux "revolution" will occur, or how fast it will be, but I can always hope. If you want to laugh about a consumer like myself hoping that a free OS will be more readily available to me and others in the future, go ahead, but I see nothing funny about it.
That's cool, thanks for the feedback, it's a shame that more common window managers like Metacity, Compiz, and KWin haven't implemented something like that. You'd think that with a proper desktop implementation, it should be able to scale to any size and could thus manage running on screen resolutions ranging from multi-display to mobile devices. It's always really bugged me all the different SDKs for different mobile "platforms" that were all based on Linux, but perhaps one really awesome desktop environment to rule them all isn't possible? Sad.
Right, if there needs to be some new, better Linux software packaging formats, so be it, and as I pointed out some solutions are being worked on now. GoboLinux should be easily compatible with software installation, as of course one thing that makes it unique is the directory structure, and all pathing issues should be resolved by now so that everything is relative/special or *some* kind of solution for proper communication. You should be able to configure the package manager to put certain types of files where ever you want.
Whatever it takes to make Linux more modular and allows interoperability and proper communication between programs and packages and the system. More modularity means less fragmentation which means more freedom which means more customizations which means more Linux software which means more...
Oh, and everyone wants to save money, that's a pretty big incentive for companies and consumers alike, but when you don't know you actually CAN save money and haven't actually looked at and considered all the options, that makes things pretty fucking hard.
Why do you think there are mandates in many countries to take a look at and consider open source? Because some people still haven't even HEARD of it, perhaps that has something to do with it, so no, the market isn't fair and perfect and everyone is not clearly informed of the options they have.
Being ignorant of political forces doesn't make them vanish. If you think the markets are balanced and perfectly fair, that consumer's minds are clear and 100% knowledgeable about the ins and outs of everything they are getting involved in when they make a computer purchase or take their computer in for "repair", you've got a lot to learn. This is why geeks often choose Linux. Not because geeks are brainwashed retards, but because "geeks" often actually know and understand a thing or two about software and hardware. Most of us will never stop trying to help every computer user, from the general user to the company CEO, it's about education, and believe it or not companies with billions of dollars are able to out-market the voice of us techs/geeks/admins/devs/etc, but now especially with the advent of the Internet, eventually we will be heard.
Seriously, why does the post have to be so...complex? It's called Apache. It's a web server. You want to run it on a virtual host or run the program virtually, that's your business.
So that settles it, this site has been officially taken over by MS enthusiasts? ^^
You do that and install Vista, because that would really be the insightful thing to do according to your moderation points, as Vista is the most streamlined OS, perfect for portable devices using slower CPUs.
Slashdot Mirror
It's funny to see that some companies are using Wine/Cider more and more. The Mac version of Spore, for example, really isn't a Mac version at all, it's the Windows version wrapped up in Wine/Cider. It's smart for companies to choose to use libraries which are cross-platform, so right now Wine is providing that. Of course you can run Linux programs on Windows because Linux libraries are also cross-platform to my knowledge, so hopefully what things will evolve into is a battle among cross-platform libraries, making the OS not matter. Once that starts happening more, hoping it will continue, more and more programs will be cross-platform, then who will be out in the cold? I know, how about the company charging $300 for Vista Ultimate. So yeah, that would be nice to see happen. Cross-platformness and cross-distroness everything FTW.
No doubt about their abuse, and IMO there should be a LOT more lawsuits against them, but the poster is definitely right in that Microsoft has actually invested a little bit of bought-out ideas into some of their software due to competition from Apple, Linux, and OSS in general. IE would not be as less-sucky-than-it-was if it weren't for Firefox and other OSS.
Thank you. "Durrrr I use Linux but I hate Linux software being usable! I don't want any more Linux software, vi is all I need!" Yeah, ok you go away and create some program that only you know how to use, so the rest of us can help push Linux software development by making it more usable and easier to access so that us as well as others can use it, attracting more to the platform and allowing even more software development/use to occur.
I just don't understand how anyone could purposefully want to shoot themselves like that, it's the most selfish asinine lacking-in-common-sense thing I've ever heard.
Because you use Linux, you need to realize that what you are using is community-driven software. If there are no longer communities to drive that software, that software won't exist, or at least won't progress anymore, depending. So, if you're a Linux user, you should always care about it's uptake as it directly effects you, whether you like that fact or not. If Linux had 90% desktop share, right now today, Linux software would be in much better shape than it is and there would be many many more programs for Linux. You like programs, don't you? That's what I thought.
Or quite simply put, the parent is a fucking idiot. I'm sorry but preaching that less Linux use is a good thing when you yourself use it is contrary to all economic, social, and common sense thought. If you're using Linux just because it's a niche OS, you badly need to re-diagnose your life. And for anyone even thinking about making the argument that using something that is less popular is good just because there are less viruses is full of it too, because obscurity is not good security even if it may help in the short run.
Oh geez sure, Flash-only sites are horrible for normal navigation, though I'm sure they'll work to get browsing navigation buttons working with flash-only sites, just a matter of time. Same with the default font size, I'll bet Flash will find a way to communicate with the browser or desktop for the default font sizes, though IMO full-page zooming is much better than changing default font sizes for a web browser. No clue why Firefox doesn't have a changeable default zoom level for websites, instead it only remembers any changes to specific website zoom levels, which is just half of the solution.
Any way, that wasn't what I was asking. I know SVG, and it's not an animation format. I'm asking for a web animation rendering format. While I agree that SVG static rendering should also be a part of basic HTML standards, what was needed was SVG animation control standards. IMO, you should be able to make a website and say create circle in this area and move it to this location over this period of time, or whatever, so that shape/SVG manipulation is easily possible through basic web standards. This is so basic and simple that I just don't understand why no one has done anything like that, why in the hell does it seem like Flash is the only implementation of SVG animation? Just seems crazy to me.
It may be the player, it may be the driver, not sure, but of course now I can't find tearing on one thing I try so... :P
Compiz is something that I don't think I've never not seen tearing on. Try moving a window around with wobbly windows on and you should see tearing. Obviously this will be a little harder to spot on higher end cards.
If binaries aren't modular like they should be, then clearly someone didn't list their dependencies correctly, or someone found a problem with one of the libraries which should then be ironed out. All libraries should have clear, solid APIs which have room for expansion. I think you're confusing "binary blobs", what is meant by that is a blob of something in which you cannot touch, which is up to some closed company to maintain so it can't be easily worked on by whoever is complaining about it because they don't have the source code to look at. So, they are complaining about closed source software, not binaries. Everything you run is a binary, and probably 99% of all software that is ever downloaded is in binary. Users should never have to compile a kernel or OpenOffice or X unless they want to, and if you demand that from them Linux will never overtake Windows and Mac, and that's something I want to happen and I'm going to help it happen, so no, telling everyone to compile is never acceptable unless someone wants to.
Yes but you know as well as I do that Satan is definitely not limited to "challenging religious faith", there's a lot more than that. Satan is defined in many different places so if you take all of those definitions as true then he's definitely an asshole. But, yes, if you want to have a religion which believes in the good parts about Satan...or...well, the good part at least about questioning "faith", haha, then whatever, but that's a pretty hypocritical "religion" to believe in. If you believe religious faith should be challenged then believing in Satan is pretty dumb unless it's meant to be sarcasm like the flying spaghetti monster.
"I simply don't think open source CAN develop a first class desktop experience."
While I agree that certain things like GTK vs. QT could use some streamlining so that, for instance, the user was in almost total control over the way their programs look and feel, just because some developers choose not to develop for desktop standards doesn't mean the end of the world. Users do have the choice on the programs they use, so if there's some program like Blender which doesn't use, nor do I think it has the option to use (but could be wrong, someone might have made something by now) a more standard GUI interface which they can control the theme on doesn't mean the whole Linux desktop experience is destroyed. They can simply not use that program. That's one of the differences between OSX/Windows and the free desktops is developers have the option to make their own interface. So, I agree that users should be in charge of their GUIs and developers need to give that control over to their users as to whether they want to use the developer's interface which they think is better, or their own one, though in any case it should be at least color theme-able! So, basically, more Linux modularity goodness, please, not "standardization" in the sense of removing choice, but modularity in the sense of giving more freedom to everyone, and that's the way things are heading. More developers are realizing that users + more freedom = bigger user base, while other developers just don't care, but that's OK because no one has to use their program.
So, I think it's definitely moving in that direction but certainly needs improvement and more modularity/planning on the behalf of developers, and I think more constructive criticism is definitely good and needed, but it's definitely not impossible for Linux to get a thousand programs under it's belt which are seemless, because it's happening and will continue to happen, thanks in part to efforts like freedesktop.org and the Linux Foundation, though I keep wondering if the latter's methods for unifying is the correct path (trying to push standardization more than modularity and simply smart programming).
I don't understand how you can defend ALSA by admitting its such a bad audio API that it had to be brushed under the rug by hiding it under a bastardized API like Pulse.
Oh I'm definitely not defending it, I'm merely suggesting another API to you and was wondering why the attack when PA exists, which happens to be becoming more common it seems like, so perhaps it's worth taking a look at. I fully agree there should be a/some APIs which are completely separate from the sound servers so that we can get some more modularity there for situations like you mentioned if they don't have Pulse Audio installed (though it should then be a dependency and the user should be able to easily install and run it of course). If we can get a good Linux audio API in there, that will free up the programming nightmare and allow that freedom to swap out and drop in any sound server you want, creating more competition between the sound servers because there will actually be choice. Like you said, you won't be forced to develop for or not develop for a particular sound API based on it's popularity. Again for the love of all things that are awesome, more modularity please. More developers need to realize the importance of design modularity. If I were making a program that used sound, and was told that I needed to pick one of the sound servers and develop for it specifically and there was no cross-server API I could use to quickly and easily let the user decide the sound server they thought was best aside from programming for every one that I thought might be common, I'd work on making the fucking thing, not whining about how it didn't exist. It hopefully shouldn't be too hard to do, because APIs are or should be quite small, being a simple "wrapper" or universal interface to whatever backend. Sure, I'd have to then program for all of the most common s
Though tearing also plagues Linux, I haven't seen a video card/driver setup yet which doesn't have tearing unless some of the latest Intel or ATI drivers have fixed it. I'm glad that the Intel, X, and other devs/users have brought it up, hopefully soon it'll be a thing of the past.
Ubuntu Linux tops 8 million users.
That's just Ubuntu. Not that it matters, I just want the number of Linux users to go higher regardless of what the actual number is right now.
I imagine the number is shrinking in the face of the fact that OSX is so well done.
You think an OS with a pre-loaded dock which is still tied to overpriced hardware should be outdoing a completely free OS which can have a dock as well as a hundred number of other ways of starting programs? I agree that certain things need better streamlining on Linux believe me, but I don't agree with your statement if only Linux had actual consumer choice behind it and visibility. Even though it may sound cliche that doesn't mean it's not true, I largely blame Microsoft's business practices for this. I think many consumers would choose the much cheaper Linux option, if they had the choice presented. I just disagree on that one point, but appreciate your criticism.
About ALSA though, I still don't understand why it's getting so much hate when Pulseaudio has been adopted by many of the "biggest" distros and is available of course for anyone to install. From Wikipedia: In a typical installation scenario under Linux, the user configures ALSA to use a virtual device provided by PulseAudio. Thus, applications using ALSA will output sound to PulseAudio, which then uses ALSA itself to access the real sound card. PulseAudio also provides its own native interface to applications that want to support PulseAudio directly, as well as a legacy interface for ESD applications, making it suitable as a drop-in replacement for ESD. So, perhaps you should take a look at PA's API then. ^^ Would be nice to have a few standardized audio APIs though which could be used with any sound server, but for now the sound servers are the ones being flexible and modular by being able to communicate with all these different APIs, like PA can, so that's better than nothing.
What exactly is one of the best "flash alternatives" currently? Still can't fathom why vector graphics manipulation isn't part of HTML "1.0" since flash was around back then. :P
(Yes, I know how to worship the googly, but asking is more fun.)
I think most developers are interested in usability but some don't know how to best go about it. For instance one thing that bugs me that you mention is QT vs. GTK. What is needed is a system that is more modular so that developers don't need to split their effort between the two, slowing down progress. What's needed is a standardized API for GUI programs which can then be used by either of these libraries, so any program will look like a native, or close to native, KDE or Gnome program depending on which one you have loaded, or on user preferences, etc.
Whatever it takes to unify Linux more to streamline it more and get things moving forward faster will be a major help. It's those kinds of things that few talk about but which can really make a difference. Of course there are already several great examples where this has happened but there is certainly room for improvement.
While I'm on a rant I'll mention my usual bitching about Linux packaging urgently needing attention, too, so developers can finally make a package that can be used on any distro, and the Linux user base can really expand when some of them aren't forced to use the command line to compile to get certain programs, not to mention pick distros (software bundles) regardless of the particular size of their repos.
I'm looking forward to the day when which distro is installed on a system isn't really important, all that is important is that it's Linux, because any and all Linux software will still be easily available. That's true freedom. (Don't let anyone tell you it's impossible, either, as modularity is always possible.)
The OP is talking about being able to install any Linux software easily, not just DEB packages. This is entirely possible, but because either the formats are full of fail, or the package managers are, or something, no one could make at least SOME manager compatible with most of the most popular package formats, or no one could make one package format which could be used by any of the managers. This is beyond retarded, there's no reason for it other than possibly the greed of bigger distros wanting the size of their repos to be one of the factors for attracting users, and needs to be quickly overcome. This is the kind of stupid fragmentation that doesn't make sense that Linux does not need right now. See my reply to the OP for links and more information.
A package manager should be as easy to use as an archive manager. Want to install some new software that came out in some new package format? Just install a plugin, or an updated version of your manager, and you're on your way. That's how Linux packaging should be.
Yes, it should be, and you shouldn't have to look for DEB packages if you're on a Linux distro using a deb-only package manager or a RPM if you're on one using a RPM-only manager. All package managers should be made compatible with at least one format(preferably more) so Linux software installation is simple, instead of Linux users having to hit website after website of software where the developers never bothered to release some kind of binary because of this mess, or they release a binary which isn't a normal package, and even if it does it doesn't contain the information inside it for a URL for automatic updates. Instead us Linux users often have to deal with out-of-date software because we're stuck waiting on our distro maintainer to specially package everything under the sun we could ever want, which is impossible, and which gives certain larger distros an unfair advantage. Or, we have to compile it, which limits the numbers of Linux users greatly because obviously normal users don't know how and most users don't want to bother with doing it even if they do know. So, yeah, I'd say it was a big problem.
Can read why Linux software installation sucks part one and two, and read about two projects hoping to make it better in the future.
How can you have a savings to blow if you do it every Tuesday? You get paid twice per week?
Right, just because you have the freedom to speak your ideas doesn't mean everyone has to listen to them, and while there are disturbing/mean things in both Christian and Muslim religions, there's really nothing nice about Satan, which was the original point of his invention I'm sure, and that's enough of a reason for a site to want to ignore such a distro.
Besides, packaging some GDM themes, desktop themes, and wallpaper and calling it a distro is pretty lame since anyone can easily install themes anyway, not that having the theme you want being default isn't a nice touch, if a small one.
You just keep right on thinking that anything I say must be wrong because I must be just a fanboy, but I know that there is such a thing as the abuse of powers of monopolies, and that MS and other companies have done things that are hurtful to consumer's choice. I will never say there are no problems with Linux, that would obviously be insane to say, but I can very easily argue that Linux and other operating systems would be in a much better place right now if it wasn't for the abuse of power by monopolies. The fact is, you can make it easy for competition to occur, or you can make it hard, and any other operating system besides Windows has had life made extremely difficult for them because of Microsoft, and I don't think many of the things that they've done to cause that are legal, or should be considered legal.
Like I said, I don't know when or if ever a Linux "revolution" will occur, or how fast it will be, but I can always hope. If you want to laugh about a consumer like myself hoping that a free OS will be more readily available to me and others in the future, go ahead, but I see nothing funny about it.
That's cool, thanks for the feedback, it's a shame that more common window managers like Metacity, Compiz, and KWin haven't implemented something like that. You'd think that with a proper desktop implementation, it should be able to scale to any size and could thus manage running on screen resolutions ranging from multi-display to mobile devices. It's always really bugged me all the different SDKs for different mobile "platforms" that were all based on Linux, but perhaps one really awesome desktop environment to rule them all isn't possible? Sad.
Right, if there needs to be some new, better Linux software packaging formats, so be it, and as I pointed out some solutions are being worked on now. GoboLinux should be easily compatible with software installation, as of course one thing that makes it unique is the directory structure, and all pathing issues should be resolved by now so that everything is relative/special or *some* kind of solution for proper communication. You should be able to configure the package manager to put certain types of files where ever you want.
Whatever it takes to make Linux more modular and allows interoperability and proper communication between programs and packages and the system. More modularity means less fragmentation which means more freedom which means more customizations which means more Linux software which means more...
Oh, and everyone wants to save money, that's a pretty big incentive for companies and consumers alike, but when you don't know you actually CAN save money and haven't actually looked at and considered all the options, that makes things pretty fucking hard.
Why do you think there are mandates in many countries to take a look at and consider open source? Because some people still haven't even HEARD of it, perhaps that has something to do with it, so no, the market isn't fair and perfect and everyone is not clearly informed of the options they have.
Being ignorant of political forces doesn't make them vanish. If you think the markets are balanced and perfectly fair, that consumer's minds are clear and 100% knowledgeable about the ins and outs of everything they are getting involved in when they make a computer purchase or take their computer in for "repair", you've got a lot to learn. This is why geeks often choose Linux. Not because geeks are brainwashed retards, but because "geeks" often actually know and understand a thing or two about software and hardware. Most of us will never stop trying to help every computer user, from the general user to the company CEO, it's about education, and believe it or not companies with billions of dollars are able to out-market the voice of us techs/geeks/admins/devs/etc, but now especially with the advent of the Internet, eventually we will be heard.
Download and install Apache for Linux.
Seriously, why does the post have to be so...complex? It's called Apache. It's a web server. You want to run it on a virtual host or run the program virtually, that's your business.
So that settles it, this site has been officially taken over by MS enthusiasts? ^^
You do that and install Vista, because that would really be the insightful thing to do according to your moderation points, as Vista is the most streamlined OS, perfect for portable devices using slower CPUs.
Geezus...