While I agree, wanting to keep certain sites more on-topic isn't an illegitimate want. Of course if the admins disagree, the only option is to make another site.
Sorry but JAlexoi's comment is no Linux fanboy statement and is mostly true. Most consumers still don't know about Linux nor even understand that if they buy the Windows computer they will be paying for Windows (they think that because it is "lost" in the price, and part of the "package", it somehow means it is free). If they do know about Linux, chances are it was from a Best Buy Microsoft trainee telling them that Windows is Better (tm), or something like that.
If you switched Microsoft's position with, say, Canonical's or Red Hat's, and suddenly Microsoft was the one without those "insider special deals and discounts" (monopolistic bribery) for getting their OS on the majority of retail computers bundled with them, and Linux was, you would see an almost perfect flip-flop in the sales figures, and most likely I would think more of a demand for Linux. In other words, the sales figures for Linux aren't because Linux sucks, it's mostly because of marketing and the existing monopoly, and I think a lot of consumers would prefer Linux, even the gamers because at that point you'd have most every game being release for Linux, or at least a lot more Linux games.
"The only thing I wish would happen is that the market demand fair pricing, so we can see reasonable network service charges like I saw in Asia: unlimited Internet, whether mobile browsing or tethered access, should cost about $30/month and be available unbundled from contracts."
This is what I've been waiting for for a very long time, and why I've had no cell phone here for several years. I refuse to use their current laughable "Internet" services. Capitalism doesn't equate to technological progress here like is promised, but rather makes companies squeeze and slow down the advancement of each industry so that they can milk every last cent from old technology. There's no reason they can't offer these kinds of plans here.
On a similar note, I also can't wait for phones to behave just like computers so that you can easily install a Linux OS on them instead of waiting for a port for a specific model. Phones should be no different than a PC, with a unique CPU arch, screen, and other hardware, so that as long as you have the drivers and a desktop environment that works on small screens, you're good to go. AFAIK though distros like Android aren't trying to implement drivers for as much phone hardware as they can and you can't just go and download it and install it to USB or whatnot to use to install on your phone. I see no "download Android" links off the main site page, for example, so it looks like just the source is available. Please correct me if I'm wrong about any of this though.
I guess the problem is Google is concerned about the Internet, which means browsers, and couldn't care less about a specific OS. Focusing on programming for web standards means you're programming for all OSes. It's more of a side swipe than a direct attack against M$. Besides, a lot of the software for Linux competes against Google, like being able to run OpenOffice on Chrome OS instead of having to use Google Docs. Not that OOo would run on a netbook super well but you get the point. So while Google could push for OSS by siding with Linux, I think they'd rather get rid of both Linux and Windows as far as basing apps on either and focus on the web which has their interests at heart.
Don't get me wrong, having a quick-loading OS that just loads a browser WILL be useful for many and Good Enough, but of course being a Linux user I want to see normal Linux distros become ultra fast and make it onto desktops more as well. (and so should Mac and Windows users as it means more competition and lower prices for them)
Oh but what if you didn't mean to double click? Would you then make it require a triple click? Where does it end? How about you click on something only if you want to open it? Requiring a second click for "verification" is just silly and pointless. I think you're used to double-clicking, so that when you tried moving to a single click desktop, you made mistakes because you weren't used to opening things with a single click.
If the government created its own software, it would be far, far, far far far cheaper, especially of course any software used on millions of computers like for education, police, fire, etc, but also for the bloated central government as well. For example, school districts across the country paying $$$$$$ for hundreds of thousands of licenses for Reader Rabbit could easily pay 1/100000 the cost and developer their own. All it takes is communication/coordination/working together, which is of course what OSS is. Once you have the software, updating/improving it costs even less usually and so future costs would be very low unlike with closed software usually demanding the same high costs over and over again. That adds up.
Each OS has its share of problems, but claiming that one vastly overshadows the other as a whole is silly.
IMO, Windows has mainly two things going for it over Linux, games and GUI tools. Since Windows has always been GUI-focused, Microsoft has created ways of doing most anything you'd need to have done in a GUI. Of course, this means that automation and the command line tools have been sorely lacking, though this is changing with Microsoft's importation/duplication/copying of various Linux/Unix tools in their newer versions, probably mostly the result of their "Linux Lab" work. Because if the power of automation on Linux, it has been a very strong server market contender, but needs to be careful since "lazy" server administrators are liking GUIs and the overhead of GUIs is less important now days I think. So, after disabling all the visual effects of Vista 7 and basically making the desktop be Windows 2000 again, there is an appeal of the Windows *desktop* over the Linux *desktop* for server administrators in some ways. Linux server administration tools are definitely out there and becoming more common, but I think this is an area Linux needs to step up its game still.
In the games realm, from what I've seen it seems there has been more of an effort in making games cross-platform thanks to competition from Linux and Mac. Linux continues to spread virally and along with desktop improvements are making cross-platform OpenGL games more appealing to developers. With the push to the browser as a platform, this really helps Linux as well, and is also good for combating the above-mentioned competition in the server area, too.
All in all, Linux has a very bright future, but should never give up on pushing against Windows in the ways where it still holds advantages, and it won't give up.
I know that there is hardware out there that doesn't work, and that quickly increases when you get into certain types of peripherals, but so far my "gambling" has yielded 100% success. I go out, buy whatever hardware I want, and it just works every time, as for my base computer that is. Like I said, for things like, say, webcams, I've had to be more careful and make sure that the cam is UVC-compliant for instance, or uses firewire. You know, actual standards. Then Linux support is cake.
"Perhaps you could call attention to particular aspects of PulseAudio's design you disagree with?"
Its failurenesstitude? Or how about non-workingness version 1.2? Those were two pretty bad features IMO.
Sorry, it's just that as others have pointed out, it's pretty broken and not ready for prime time, and its inclusion in many popular distros by default was a poor decision and has contributed to Linux looking pretty second-rate. I hope the problems get resolved but perhaps that will take improving the old systems, starting something else, or replacing everything. Linux needs quality rock-solid low-latency playback first and features second, not to mention good standards which require as little as possible for application developers to interface with it.
I've watched my roommate struggle with exploring new Windows sound editing and composing programs. On most any system you have to try things out, find out what works, and works easily, and what you like. Yes, there are a greater number of professional sound editing and composing programs for the other major OSes, obviously, so your selection of good ones for Linux will be fewer. After you learn which ones you like and are the easiest, if you do (which you may not when comparing to audio programs for other OSes), of course you'll then be spending time playing with editing and composing audio instead of looking for and tinkering with new programs. ^^
Which is why many are glad to see Intel, Google, HP, Dell, and others make various pushes for Linux. Not sure which ones might pay out big bucks for commercials though, or perhaps it'd be a combined effort between some of them.
Sure, not good vs. bad in some super religious moral way, but if you don't recognize that an increase of freedom and competition for consumers is a good thing, you're a moron. I'm not saying it has nothing to do with "morality" though, because it certainly does. You can't completely remove anything from the moral spectrum, really, as the moral spectrum overlaps everything. Businesses like Microsoft always try to give the image that wanting money is an inherently good and just goal though no matter what getting more money involves in order to try to justify their actions, but it's simply not true. Regardless, this change helps make everything cheaper for everyone in the long run and helps push Linux development further no matter where you live, so be grateful. ^^
Exactly. Whether or not they were trying to say fuck off to M$ software, their actions said it and that's what matters. Were they right in doing so? Lets see: cheaper, faster, better, more freedom...yep.
It's a sad truth, but to go further, new things are brought to life by companies pushing correlation to known/old things. A company name, for example, that is known, pushes a new product. The new product must be cool, because you already know the company. In reverse, some unknown companies will try to push a product which looks like something that is similar to what they know. "Oh, this looks like an ipod, I guess Rikkitikkytinyhoe Co. is awesome!" Smart consumers won't see this, but most consumers aren't smart and open-minded enough to consider things they don't already know about. The young do, because they like exploring, but the ones with money, the old, often don't. Higher price = better quality is also burned into consumer's brains.
Thus, given the above, Linux will probably grow the fastest through known companies that push it. Google Linux, IBM Linux, HP Linux, etc, if they even choose to mention the name Linux (which they don't have to, they can just talk about themselves and their software and how awesome they are), and maybe even eventually Microsoft Linux, that will probably be how the majority of stupid consumers come to adopt Linux.
Linux "advocacy" is far from retarded, if that advocacy means simply informing others of more choice. Of course you can't FORCE others to use something, that's a given. The fact is, most average computer users only know what the stores sell to them, and the stores sell to them things that cost money so the store can take a cut of the profit (not that they can't charge money for Linux, but Microsoft puts lots of pressure in the form of money savings to only sell Windows which is unfair). Any way, a lot of consumers are clamoring for computer "secrets", help from someone who knows computers to tell them where they can get the good deals and avoid the scams and crappy software and hardware to save money. I've had several users chase me down wanting to know about alternatives to Microsoft, and alternatives to X Y and Z crappy hardware or software.
You should spread your knowledge the best you can to try to help others. Just do it in a way that comes across as trying to be helpful and not "I know better than you what you want".
There's no excuse for not using standards that are cross-platform. Doing so is dumb/fail/stupid. Why do you think there is so much development for "cloud computing" and java stuff? College IT departments, along with those in ALL educational surroundings, need to remember they are taking on the responsibility of teachers and are directly influencing the lives of students. They need to remember they are targets for corruption from software companies wanting to convince them to make their students buy the company's products. They directly help determine how expensive it will be for students to attend college. With all this in mind, using open source software and cross-platform software to give the students freedom and help lower college costs. Students should indeed be concerned about it and try to attend colleges which care about their wallets, freedom, and flexibility.
Oh you can stick with the old versions of KDE and Gnome if you want, if there are enough who like them then they will stick around. As for the Mac GUI though, hated it. Tried it for several hours and scrambled to get back to Gnome. Out of all the DE's I've ever used, Gnome = 3. Enlightenment and some of the other DEs are pretty nice though once you get used to them, but OS X I just could not get used to, nor am I interested in ever trying to support and use closed source DEs ever again.
I don't understand why they can't make everything scale nicely, IMO that should be top priority. Having an easy way to scale the size of everything on the desktop would make it very easy for those who can't see well to make their desktops usable without having to fiddle around with font sizes and themes and such. It would also make it a snap to make the same desktop usable on a netbook.
To go off on a small tangent, that's the of the main things the open source movement should be centered around is portability with all things, including desktop environments and any and all programs, so that users will have more freedom to use things easily where they want and how they want without difficult tweaking/reprogramming. Software that makes both developer's lives easier as well as end users, it should be possible to fulfill both.
Slashdot Mirror
To inform the /. n00blets? ^^
While I agree, wanting to keep certain sites more on-topic isn't an illegitimate want. Of course if the admins disagree, the only option is to make another site.
Modding up done.
OK I lied, someone else gave you score 5, but I would have if I could have.
~# mod makomk up
That's right, I didn't just sudo, I became root to give you a genuine, admin-endorsed modding up.
Sorry but JAlexoi's comment is no Linux fanboy statement and is mostly true. Most consumers still don't know about Linux nor even understand that if they buy the Windows computer they will be paying for Windows (they think that because it is "lost" in the price, and part of the "package", it somehow means it is free). If they do know about Linux, chances are it was from a Best Buy Microsoft trainee telling them that Windows is Better (tm), or something like that.
If you switched Microsoft's position with, say, Canonical's or Red Hat's, and suddenly Microsoft was the one without those "insider special deals and discounts" (monopolistic bribery) for getting their OS on the majority of retail computers bundled with them, and Linux was, you would see an almost perfect flip-flop in the sales figures, and most likely I would think more of a demand for Linux. In other words, the sales figures for Linux aren't because Linux sucks, it's mostly because of marketing and the existing monopoly, and I think a lot of consumers would prefer Linux, even the gamers because at that point you'd have most every game being release for Linux, or at least a lot more Linux games.
"The only thing I wish would happen is that the market demand fair pricing, so we can see reasonable network service charges like I saw in Asia: unlimited Internet, whether mobile browsing or tethered access, should cost about $30/month and be available unbundled from contracts."
This is what I've been waiting for for a very long time, and why I've had no cell phone here for several years. I refuse to use their current laughable "Internet" services. Capitalism doesn't equate to technological progress here like is promised, but rather makes companies squeeze and slow down the advancement of each industry so that they can milk every last cent from old technology. There's no reason they can't offer these kinds of plans here.
On a similar note, I also can't wait for phones to behave just like computers so that you can easily install a Linux OS on them instead of waiting for a port for a specific model. Phones should be no different than a PC, with a unique CPU arch, screen, and other hardware, so that as long as you have the drivers and a desktop environment that works on small screens, you're good to go. AFAIK though distros like Android aren't trying to implement drivers for as much phone hardware as they can and you can't just go and download it and install it to USB or whatnot to use to install on your phone. I see no "download Android" links off the main site page, for example, so it looks like just the source is available. Please correct me if I'm wrong about any of this though.
I guess the problem is Google is concerned about the Internet, which means browsers, and couldn't care less about a specific OS. Focusing on programming for web standards means you're programming for all OSes. It's more of a side swipe than a direct attack against M$. Besides, a lot of the software for Linux competes against Google, like being able to run OpenOffice on Chrome OS instead of having to use Google Docs. Not that OOo would run on a netbook super well but you get the point. So while Google could push for OSS by siding with Linux, I think they'd rather get rid of both Linux and Windows as far as basing apps on either and focus on the web which has their interests at heart.
Don't get me wrong, having a quick-loading OS that just loads a browser WILL be useful for many and Good Enough, but of course being a Linux user I want to see normal Linux distros become ultra fast and make it onto desktops more as well. (and so should Mac and Windows users as it means more competition and lower prices for them)
Oh but what if you didn't mean to double click? Would you then make it require a triple click? Where does it end? How about you click on something only if you want to open it? Requiring a second click for "verification" is just silly and pointless. I think you're used to double-clicking, so that when you tried moving to a single click desktop, you made mistakes because you weren't used to opening things with a single click.
You know, downloading and installing 9.10 would have been 4-10 times faster, but I guess you already knew that.
If the government created its own software, it would be far, far, far far far cheaper, especially of course any software used on millions of computers like for education, police, fire, etc, but also for the bloated central government as well. For example, school districts across the country paying $$$$$$ for hundreds of thousands of licenses for Reader Rabbit could easily pay 1/100000 the cost and developer their own. All it takes is communication/coordination/working together, which is of course what OSS is. Once you have the software, updating/improving it costs even less usually and so future costs would be very low unlike with closed software usually demanding the same high costs over and over again. That adds up.
Each OS has its share of problems, but claiming that one vastly overshadows the other as a whole is silly.
IMO, Windows has mainly two things going for it over Linux, games and GUI tools. Since Windows has always been GUI-focused, Microsoft has created ways of doing most anything you'd need to have done in a GUI. Of course, this means that automation and the command line tools have been sorely lacking, though this is changing with Microsoft's importation/duplication/copying of various Linux/Unix tools in their newer versions, probably mostly the result of their "Linux Lab" work. Because if the power of automation on Linux, it has been a very strong server market contender, but needs to be careful since "lazy" server administrators are liking GUIs and the overhead of GUIs is less important now days I think. So, after disabling all the visual effects of Vista 7 and basically making the desktop be Windows 2000 again, there is an appeal of the Windows *desktop* over the Linux *desktop* for server administrators in some ways. Linux server administration tools are definitely out there and becoming more common, but I think this is an area Linux needs to step up its game still.
In the games realm, from what I've seen it seems there has been more of an effort in making games cross-platform thanks to competition from Linux and Mac. Linux continues to spread virally and along with desktop improvements are making cross-platform OpenGL games more appealing to developers. With the push to the browser as a platform, this really helps Linux as well, and is also good for combating the above-mentioned competition in the server area, too.
All in all, Linux has a very bright future, but should never give up on pushing against Windows in the ways where it still holds advantages, and it won't give up.
I know that there is hardware out there that doesn't work, and that quickly increases when you get into certain types of peripherals, but so far my "gambling" has yielded 100% success. I go out, buy whatever hardware I want, and it just works every time, as for my base computer that is. Like I said, for things like, say, webcams, I've had to be more careful and make sure that the cam is UVC-compliant for instance, or uses firewire. You know, actual standards. Then Linux support is cake.
"Perhaps you could call attention to particular aspects of PulseAudio's design you disagree with?"
Its failurenesstitude? Or how about non-workingness version 1.2? Those were two pretty bad features IMO.
Sorry, it's just that as others have pointed out, it's pretty broken and not ready for prime time, and its inclusion in many popular distros by default was a poor decision and has contributed to Linux looking pretty second-rate. I hope the problems get resolved but perhaps that will take improving the old systems, starting something else, or replacing everything. Linux needs quality rock-solid low-latency playback first and features second, not to mention good standards which require as little as possible for application developers to interface with it.
What are these "standards" and warm fuzzies you speak of, why would anyone want to play nicely with others, and why are you still on my lawn?!!!!!
:P
(in other words, I agree)
I've watched my roommate struggle with exploring new Windows sound editing and composing programs. On most any system you have to try things out, find out what works, and works easily, and what you like. Yes, there are a greater number of professional sound editing and composing programs for the other major OSes, obviously, so your selection of good ones for Linux will be fewer. After you learn which ones you like and are the easiest, if you do (which you may not when comparing to audio programs for other OSes), of course you'll then be spending time playing with editing and composing audio instead of looking for and tinkering with new programs. ^^
"So where is Sound on Linux? In my opinion it's in a pretty good state"
If you call crackling system sounds on every computer I've ever tried Pulse Audio on as a "good state". It definitely wasn't ready to be the default.
Which is why many are glad to see Intel, Google, HP, Dell, and others make various pushes for Linux. Not sure which ones might pay out big bucks for commercials though, or perhaps it'd be a combined effort between some of them.
Sure, not good vs. bad in some super religious moral way, but if you don't recognize that an increase of freedom and competition for consumers is a good thing, you're a moron. I'm not saying it has nothing to do with "morality" though, because it certainly does. You can't completely remove anything from the moral spectrum, really, as the moral spectrum overlaps everything. Businesses like Microsoft always try to give the image that wanting money is an inherently good and just goal though no matter what getting more money involves in order to try to justify their actions, but it's simply not true. Regardless, this change helps make everything cheaper for everyone in the long run and helps push Linux development further no matter where you live, so be grateful. ^^
Exactly. Whether or not they were trying to say fuck off to M$ software, their actions said it and that's what matters. Were they right in doing so? Lets see: cheaper, faster, better, more freedom...yep.
It's a sad truth, but to go further, new things are brought to life by companies pushing correlation to known/old things. A company name, for example, that is known, pushes a new product. The new product must be cool, because you already know the company. In reverse, some unknown companies will try to push a product which looks like something that is similar to what they know. "Oh, this looks like an ipod, I guess Rikkitikkytinyhoe Co. is awesome!" Smart consumers won't see this, but most consumers aren't smart and open-minded enough to consider things they don't already know about. The young do, because they like exploring, but the ones with money, the old, often don't. Higher price = better quality is also burned into consumer's brains.
Thus, given the above, Linux will probably grow the fastest through known companies that push it. Google Linux, IBM Linux, HP Linux, etc, if they even choose to mention the name Linux (which they don't have to, they can just talk about themselves and their software and how awesome they are), and maybe even eventually Microsoft Linux, that will probably be how the majority of stupid consumers come to adopt Linux.
Linux "advocacy" is far from retarded, if that advocacy means simply informing others of more choice. Of course you can't FORCE others to use something, that's a given. The fact is, most average computer users only know what the stores sell to them, and the stores sell to them things that cost money so the store can take a cut of the profit (not that they can't charge money for Linux, but Microsoft puts lots of pressure in the form of money savings to only sell Windows which is unfair). Any way, a lot of consumers are clamoring for computer "secrets", help from someone who knows computers to tell them where they can get the good deals and avoid the scams and crappy software and hardware to save money. I've had several users chase me down wanting to know about alternatives to Microsoft, and alternatives to X Y and Z crappy hardware or software.
You should spread your knowledge the best you can to try to help others. Just do it in a way that comes across as trying to be helpful and not "I know better than you what you want".
Er, not doing so I meant. Slashdot should give you a few seconds to re-edit :P
There's no excuse for not using standards that are cross-platform. Doing so is dumb/fail/stupid. Why do you think there is so much development for "cloud computing" and java stuff? College IT departments, along with those in ALL educational surroundings, need to remember they are taking on the responsibility of teachers and are directly influencing the lives of students. They need to remember they are targets for corruption from software companies wanting to convince them to make their students buy the company's products. They directly help determine how expensive it will be for students to attend college. With all this in mind, using open source software and cross-platform software to give the students freedom and help lower college costs. Students should indeed be concerned about it and try to attend colleges which care about their wallets, freedom, and flexibility.
Oh you can stick with the old versions of KDE and Gnome if you want, if there are enough who like them then they will stick around. As for the Mac GUI though, hated it. Tried it for several hours and scrambled to get back to Gnome. Out of all the DE's I've ever used, Gnome = 3. Enlightenment and some of the other DEs are pretty nice though once you get used to them, but OS X I just could not get used to, nor am I interested in ever trying to support and use closed source DEs ever again.
I don't understand why they can't make everything scale nicely, IMO that should be top priority. Having an easy way to scale the size of everything on the desktop would make it very easy for those who can't see well to make their desktops usable without having to fiddle around with font sizes and themes and such. It would also make it a snap to make the same desktop usable on a netbook.
To go off on a small tangent, that's the of the main things the open source movement should be centered around is portability with all things, including desktop environments and any and all programs, so that users will have more freedom to use things easily where they want and how they want without difficult tweaking/reprogramming. Software that makes both developer's lives easier as well as end users, it should be possible to fulfill both.