-
Website
http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com -
Original page
http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/2008/07/lusers-make-me-laugh-ver4.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
For years, I've believed the FSF were complete asshat freetards trying to push their religion on everyone else. With this latest campaign, I can prove it with a single link.
Hooray!
Just take a look at KDE 4.1:
http://www.linux.com/var/uploads/Image/articles...
A UI trainwreck. Half-assed Win2k era UI elements with a bunch of random bling/shiny bolted on is the bleeding edge Linux desktop. Un. Fucking. Believable.
Even the most basic of UI design seems to be beyond the KDE brain trust. Consistency in lighting/shadows for UI elements. Mishmash of pseudo 3D/2D UI elements with nothing like OS X's gaussian blur shadows to give the user information on active windows. And font rendering, layout, spacing, etc. a complete disaster.
This is the best 'teh power of open source' has to offer in mid-2008. This is what those pore commercial desktop companies are up against. LOL!
If Shuttleworth really wants to accomplish something other than just running his mouth off:
* Dump the KDE/Gnome fiascos and never look back
* Bypass the X Window System and drop in a brand new rendering system that is on par with OS X or Windows - no one gives a shit about remote apps
* Run an Aqua/Cocoa clone on top of the new rendering architecture
* Let legacy X apps run in a compatibility layer like they do so well under OS X
* Provide developers with an Xcode/Interface Builder/Visual Studio clone
* Bundles for apps - for drag and drop application installation, apps can be run from anywhere
* /bin,/etc/,/usr and so on all hidden by default with apps inside of /Application
* Disk images for easy application distribution
* Polished and feature complete clones of iTunes, iPhoto, iMovie, Mail, etc.
All of this would be less work than dealing with the nightmare that KDE/Gnome have become. Would there be an outcry from KDE/Gnome developers and users? Of course, but who cares they're a bunch of incompetent retards as anyone can see from what little they've accomplished over the past decade.
Give developers a single application API and desktop target and the tools to support it and they will leap at it. Five years from now commercial developers still will not have any desire to bother with the idiotic KDE/Gnome divide.
You could also close source it to discourage forks but sadly Shuttleworth likes the whole open source thing. Shuttleworth is too concerned with what the slashdot crowd thinks of him.
I also detest the name ubuntu, so I would rather see something like haiku put an end to the linux desktop fiasco.
It would be interesting to see what could have happened if the BSD's were legally free-and-clear at that time and able to attract a larger/more fervent following. After all, FreeBSD is a complete operating system, not just a kernel. And the API's and ABI's are much more stable -- a better target for development for both open and closed source, IMO.
http://www.haiku-os.org/
That's right - they're trying to recreate an operating system that hundreds of people were excited about in the mid-'90s. Good times right there.
For better or worse, Shuttleworth needs Slashdot's approval; without it, there's no way his distribution will become the "favored" distribution, which means there will be no way to get enough people using his software to make money selling support contracts. Using anything else would require nuking his business model from orbit, which may not be such a bad thing, mind you.
I was just discussing this very thing with someone a few hours ago (I ventured away from the computer and out of the house for a while). Besides discussing the need for the LSB to bring some uniformity to the multiple-distro debacle, I was saying that Ubuntu could be the one to become somewhat successful in the mainstream, but the name would hold it back. (Along with all the other problems holding back Linux in general.)
Linux will continue to be a complete basketcase of a platform outside the server space until KDE and Gnome are taken out back behind the shed and shot. Shuttleworth, someone else, it doesn't really matter. But it is clear that Shuttleworth's efforts so far have very little to show.
... or something: I see few carrots and no sticks. That model worked pretty ok so far.
Now the correct path. Don't give a stuff about Gnome or KDE at all. Select the best applications from the open source stack and provide them to your users. If you have KDE this and gnome that in the one package and they are best of bred do it.
Next work with freedesktop.org and Linux Standard Base to move KDE and Gnome to single set of configuration files and shared data storage. So in time all that is left is that KDE and Gnome is just like a interface theme.
Kill them directly is not needed. Death by 1000 cuts is far more effective.
KDE and Gnome developers can work as one. Remember at one time they even had different menu systems completely so applications had to register with gnome and kde independent.. Now evolution and kontact have merged there pim storage. So you will be able to swap between them and never have a email sync problem. The more this happens the less important KDE vs Gnome becomes. Since either then works no issue. So you try both and use the one you like most.
Common Theming would fix a lot of the issue. So gnome and kde applications would look close to the same. More backend sharing projects like the pim one. Its all about reducing the thickness of there code bases.
Its a creative one the new interface is birthed by consuming in relations. Killing KDE is kinda imposable. Merging it out of existence is the only valid path.
The same thing will happen with any new rending/window/desktop system. As well as the new system there'll have to be hundreds of libraries hanging around for compatibility with X/Gnome/KDE and people will be tempted to stick with them because it's what they know and they don't want to convert everything.
If you keep compatibility you're dragged down by a decade's worth of baggage. If you don't it's a brand new OS. Apple enforces change but they document everything, provide tools to move code to new frameworks, and announce that old features/compatibility layers will be dropped on a certain date then they drop them. However the community of Linux freaks wouldn't allow it to happen, they'd claim that Ubuntu was always a conspiracy theory by big business to destroy Linux or fork it or both. It's impossible to fix, it's beyond broken.
And what is the result of this great change if it does work? "Polished and feature complete clones of iTunes, iPhoto, iMovie, Mail, etc." If you want that, just buy a Mac, and save yourself years of anguish and bashing your head against the wall.
The issue is that there really can only be 1 sound server running on a computer at once controlling all audio output. ESD ALSA NAS were the 3. Pulse tries to cover 2 ESD and ALSA then provide its own interface. Yes it has some issues.
Most of the audio wrappers on linux don't conflit with themselfs. Windows users really don't know that most of the things counted as Linux Audio libs are also used in games running on windows. Its only really the sound servers where the mess is.
As long as someone wins the merge everything will be nice.
Did anyone even sit down and think of a design before embarking on a project to unify Linux sound? Here was a chance to avoid repeating that car crash known as X Windows and the developers went right ahead and repeated X Windows. Because network transparency is the most important thing for when it comes to sound, I can't see why anyone wouldn't want it to come out of some speakers attached to a computer 50 miles away from where I'm typing at the keyboard.
And then the lead developer said that the best thing about PulseAudio is that it broke Flash and that would force Adobe to open up their code. DirectX and QuickTime concentrate on getting sound out the computer instead of furthering a political agenda, but I suppose that's because they're done by horrible capitalist companies who deliberately write useful frameworks to make FOSS look bad.
By the way:
http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/linuxaudio.png
8.5 ms latency running a realtime kernel and jack/alsa.
Pulseaudio is a horrible hack at best. Not much more to say.
And guess what, almost all of the things, listed in that linuxaudio picture, run on windows too. According to your retarded logic, the windows audio stack sucks too. Congratulations. And the only think you need, as far as audio on linux is concerned, is the device => alsa. But some idiots decided it would be a good idea to waste time and resources in developing another useless sound daemon (pulseaudio in this case), when it is not needed (unless you plan on streaming sound through sockets).
As for bottlenecks and so forth, everything that needs to be said about X has already been said in Chapter 7 the Unix Hater's Handbook.
You say that you can port most Unix/Linux audio libraries across to Windows to make sound, this begs the following question: Why?
As for claiming that porting and running said sound libraries on Windows means that Windows sounds sucks, "according to your retarded logic" (to coin a phrase) this would also imply that porting and running X on Windows means that Windows' graphics suck.
If they do suck make Windows graphics and sounds, they suck temporarily, until the user deletes them.
Most of your post basically covers something that I didn't even write. And the last sentence kills half the logic in this blog (as of late). Just as with Windows, since most of these libraries do suck, the user (such as myself) promptly deletes them. So where does that lead your argument on sound, exactly?
As far as unix haters is concerned (a trully good book I might add, not this half-ass imitation), everything on X was more or less correct, for THAT time. And that time was 1994. Almost all of the raised points were fixed. There are new bugs and issues, just like with every other piece of software. But it is not the disaster it used to be, and it certainly doesn't have any of the issues that most of these self-proclaimed software experts here claim.
And the final point. I mentioned that, since X is shared, it is good. That is because, not only is X actually Good, it also doesn't suffer from one of the main hatreds of this blog: the insane division of resources, and multitudes of software which do the same thing.
I'm not sure, you appear to be having an argument with yourself. First you said that as you can port those libraries to Windows, Windows audio also sucks. I suppose if you need cross-platform sucky sound then you can use these libraries on Windows. Everyone else would use DirectX and then sound instantly stops sucking.
Now you say you can delete those same libraries in Linux so Linux audio doesn't suck. The problem is if you deleted those libraries in Linux, most applications wouldn't be able to produce sound because they couldn't find the library they needed. So the assault of choppy sound with odd volume levels on your ears would stop, and in this way Linux audio does indeed stop sucking. (Who needs sound anyway?)
However the point remains that there is no standard audio in Linux that applications can count on, it depends on your distribution. Windows has DirectSound, MacOS has QuickTime and (lately) CoreAudio. Linux has a mad mix of libraries, emulation layers, and daemons, all of which are needed if all applications are to have sound.
Moving onto X Windows, X is indeed shared across various Unix platforms so it does not divide resources. The whole of FOSSland is indeed focused on developing this one Window manager. And the result is it sucks. It has sucked since before the Unix Hater's Handbook was published and it still sucks till this day.
No Linux distribution has a simple control panel to control the display like Windows or Mac. Ubuntu 8.04, the one which supposedly just works, just makes up random resolution and refresh rates and shit like that. You need to dive into Xconf.org and hope you don't configure your monitor to explode. Then if you need something even more fancy like dual screen or TV out something like that you might as well set aside a week of your time to achieve the same as you would do in Windows or Mac by dragging a couple of sliders in the control panel. So now you've got your xconf.org saved and have something more-or-less like you wanted, you launch your control panel app again and your work gets obliterated as xconf.org gets re-written. And then you do something more useful with your time like format the hard disk and go back to Windows or buy a Mac.
And X11 although ancient has its benefits. It is indeed one of the few standards across all POSIX platforms, and provides a consistent framework to work with. (another such example was OSS which actually worked pretty well for sound, especially the new proprietary releases which support hardware mixing, but Linux decided they wanted to deviate from the standard and impliment ALSA (the "s" is for shitty).
Thing with X is a lot of people complain about the networking functions, which although they don't seem useful, and quite convenient to have, and don't slow down performance as much as people think. The big problem is that the FOSS implimentation just really sucks. SGI's X11 implimentation, for example, was (and still is, compared to Xorg) simply stellar.
X11 is however in drastic need of a rewrite, it's time for X12, it's time for decades of legacy code to get cleaned out. But again, it's a good system, it's just poorly implimented in FOSSland.
Get it, learn to read, then come back, and show me where exactly in my initial post did I say that I "can port those libraries to Windows".
But lets feed the troll a bit more, for the sake of consistency.
So my programs won't run if I remove pulseaudio? Great, someone needs to tell these applications that, because currently, they are doing just fine without it. The rest of that paragraph is pure speculative garbage, as usual.
The standard audio on linux is called ALSA, whether you like it or not.
DirectSound is part of DirectX, and it is certainly not the 'standard audio' on Windows. Can't comment on OSX's side, haven't used it. The rest of that paragraph is more spewed garbage.
X is not a window manager. I fail to see how exactly X 'still sucks', especially with the arguments you provided. Oh wait ...
Linux, for better or worse, is not a replacement for Windows or OSX, no matter what some freetards would like you to think. And not every bit of hardware is supported, which probably isn't its fault (more like the manufacturers). Good thing I spent 5 minutes checking whether my newest laptop was supported. I didn't open any 'xorg.conf', no matter what bullshit you speculated. Indeed, everything (except the firewire, I haven't tested it yet) seems to work just fine and dandy. Coincidently, I set up dualhead with an external monitor by just selecting the monitor and activating it. That was in some 'NVIDIA X Server Settings' application or something. But hey, if you say that it takes you a week to do that, who am I to argue. You must be a retard.
Now, speaking of useful, why does seting up a simple usb printer takes 15 freaking minutes in Windows? I thought it was supposed to 'just work', once I plugged it in. Guess not though, it needs drivers, which I had to download. I'm almost sure that OSX would've set up everything automatically. That's what ubuntu did anyway. But who am I to argue. I'd rather 'waste' my time doing something useless, like USING a computer.
"The standard audio on linux is called ALSA, whether you like it or not." -> Apart from the distributions which come with Pulseaudio as standard. And there are people who are of the opinion that OSS is the standard. Then there are the rest (see spaghetti diagram).
"DirectSound is part of DirectX, and it is certainly not the 'standard audio' on Windows." -> DirectX has been around since the days of NT/98. Games publishers were allowed to distribute an installation of DirectX with their game. Windows ME/2000 and later came with DirectX installed. If you're trying to tell me that the Windows 3.1 MME API is the standard audio on Windows then we might as well stop right here because it's getting silly.
You know how your nVidia drivers work? They replace about a 3rd of the function calls in X's API with calls to their own binary driver so it can bybass X's intrinsic suckyness (but at least its suckiness is standard across all Unixes). If you're unfortunate enough to have an ATI card you might as well give up trying to do anything remotely complicated (where complicated in Linux is simple for every other OS) or you could use Mesa which doesn't have any hardware acceleration at all so it can't do rocket science stuff like 3D or show videos within an acceptable speed. Alternatively, there are Intel's drivers, but Intel's integrated video sucks on any system.
So, basically your sound argument reduces "my distro comes with ALSA and it WorksForMe(TM)" and your graphics argument reduces to "I installed nVidia's binary drivers and they WorkForMe(TM)" and because it WorksForYou(TM), everyone else must be a retard (including Linus who couldn't get Flash to work). So all we need to do now is fix the rest of the Linix distros and add support for every video card that isn't nVidia's.
The usual Windows method to install a USB printer is install the driver then plug the USB cable in. Your mistake was looking for a program called YAPI (Yet Another Printer Installer).
Mesa has more than just intel acceleration.
Please look closer at Pulseaudio. It jacks into ALSA redirecting alsa outputs to its self. And everything with a Pulseaudio plugin as a alsa plugin so its kinda optional. Very optional. More people push this point the better.
The Official Standard of Linux Standard Base says ALSA. from a coders point of view that is all you need to bother about. Official standard of Unix's says OSS sound. So rest like pulseaudio is disregard noise.
Now just because I make a custom install disk of windows with pulseaudio on does not mean as a coder you have to give a rat's about pulseaudio when developing applications for windows. Reason pulseaudio its not part of the official API/ABI. Now why as a coder for Linux do I have to care any different about pulseaudio. Reason distributions are just custom Linux install disks nothing more. Really there big head of there place in the Linux World needs to be deflated.
Even distributions that ship with Pulseaudio its always removable. Question is how hard does the distribution make it to remove.
Question 3.1 on the Mesa FAQ demonstrates quite clearly that Mesa doesn't have any hardware acceleration on any current graphics card.
I understand there's currently a turf war between ALSA and PulseAudio, with each distro claiming its own favourite and emulating the other. And how does this help end users?
LSB is ignored because its basically useless, which is why distros come with PulseAudio. Linux 'standards' have already been done here too by the way: http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/2008/06/standar...
Anyway, at least with this thread we've put paid to the lie that there's a standard way to get sound out a Linux box and users are caught in the crossfire.
1. It breaks compatibility with anything that already exists.
2. It requires leadership and coordination - something that FOSS simply doesn't have.
3. It will require years of effort to complete, and by then it will be too late - just see how painful the transition between kde3 and kde4 is, and multiply it by several orders of magnitude.
In short - won't happen,
Existing attempts, and their current status:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y_Window_System
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectFB
I wonder if he really believed he could get anywhere just by creating Another Linux Distro. If he really wanted to succeed and had the cash, only the Apple way would have worked.
You can tell the marketers they hire aren't part of FOSS...
(And yes, that's basically cloning OS X, which is a good thing IMO)
Could you elaborate on why it's good to put energy into cloning something which has been branded as excellent ? IMO you either work on something better or you try to come up with something better.
Work on something better? I'm all for it. If it isn't another wobbly WM with 1337 FX that is.
I wonder if Shuttleworth has the wherewithal to take a real leadership role and do what needs to be done?
If not, then I wonder how long it'll be before he pulls the plug on what will eventually languish and become another failed attempt to make a profitable commercial enterprise out of the Linux desktop (assuming he isn't a complete philanthropist who doesn't care to make a cent of his investment back).
Even if Ubuntu becomes dominant in the Linux world, it's still scrapping for crumbs in the PC desktop world as a whole. Winning in your own class is one thing. Challenging the world leader is going to take something more in the way of vision (and the ability to make it reality).
I think there is a tendency to over estimate the tiny number of people who are actually KDE and Gnome developers and users.
You could spend billions of dollars and decades jerking yourself around with that crowd and accomplishing nothing. Cloning OS X would be a good choice since one just has to look at these giant threads that show up on Linux distro discussion forums about how to make you system look and act like OS X. It would be a lot of work but it would be useful work that would be moving Linux out of the 'bearded GNU freak' niche it is stuck in now.
poor
Imagine all the time and energy that went into those comments. Instead of commenting, we could have collaborated in an Eric Raymond approved, heavily armed, bazaar development style on another open source office suite. How awesome would that have been.
Not only am I angry with linux for wasting my time back when I was using it, I am now angry with it for wasting my time making me write comments in a linux hating blog.
http://xkcd.com/456/
"This really is a true story, and she doesn't know I put it in my comic because her wifi hasn't worked for weeks."
hubris seems to be a mandatory character trait for these people, right after self righteousness, arrogance, and pomposity.
I wonder how many of these lunatic fringe types there are, and if they appreciate how bad an image they are giving to the entire OSS community?
But, of course, they don't *need* to attract users. :P
Im pro-linux and that commend cracked me up.
They don't want users, they want converts.
In many ways it's worse than with the Mac crowd. Over there it's mostly an aura of insufferable smugness that the more zealous seem to develop. Of course it's not without reason, I suppose. They pay a premium for that right, though.
Good for you, man. Welcome!
They don't want users, they want converts.
Agreed. And, for God's sake, don't question the dogma that they're shoveling, or they'll harrass the shit out of you (eg. Apple store employees) or write "open letters" or fill their blogs with useless tripe, full of gnashing of teeth and wringing of hands...
In many ways it's worse than with the Mac crowd. Over there it's mostly an aura of insufferable smugness that the more zealous seem to develop. Of course it's not without reason, I suppose. They pay a premium for that right, though.
People in the Middle Ages used to buy indulgences to shorten the path to heaven ... but it didn't get them any closer. Same deal with the Mac goateed, bereted snobs. Fuck them. ;-)
I like how the author doesn't stop to think that maybe he has a bad config option set somewhere, or that maybe there's a problem with the way Firefox handles Flash in Linux. Instead he climbs to the highest branch of the zealot tree and cries conspiracy to the heavens. (Turns out there really is a problem with FF's Flash handling in Linux, and adding one .swf from Citibank's website fixes the problem.)
Sorry, I jumped onto the Submit button too soon.
Of course, they'd make up some stupid excuse and the like, but alas, it'd be fun to and to mock them.
It's like a whore who let everyone fuck her, for free, while trying to make a living selling condoms.
(stupid disqus won't let me embed pic in comment)
Our grievance is not just against Unix itself, but against the cult of Unix
zealots who defend and nurture it. They take the heat, disease, and pesti-
lence as givens, and, as ancient shamans did, display their wounds, some
self-inflicted, as proof of their power and wizardry. We aim, through blunt-
ness and humor, to show them that they pray to a tin god, and that science,
not religion, is the path to useful and friendly technology.
Well fork me, if they weren't ahead of their time. 1994 this was published and now we're seeing the whole thing over again, with slightly different code.
> Our grievance is not just against Unix itself, but against the cult of Unix
> zealots who defend and nurture it. They take the heat, disease, and pesti-
> lence as givens, and, as ancient shamans did, display their wounds, some
> self-inflicted, as proof of their power and wizardry. We aim, through blunt-
> ness and humor, to show them that they pray to a tin god, and that science,
> not religion, is the path to useful and friendly technology.
From the Unix Hater's Handbook: http://www.simson.net/ref/ugh.pdf
Seems all this already happened in 1994, but with UNIX, and different haters. Same sucky architecture though.
http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/free-so...
"..The third thing that has negatively impressed me is that open source is often used as a desperate last-ditch effort for loser software. If a product is doing poorly in the marketplace, sometimes companies release it as open source, hoping that will somehow magically revive it and make it widely used.."
Blender was not free and open source originally - it was a commercial product first developed for internal use by the graphics studio - then, at the beginning of the new millennium, a ransom was raised and the code was "freed"
but it's interesting to read at http://www.blender.org/development/architecture/ :
During the corporate (NaN, 2000-'02) years, also several attempts where made to restructure the code, to allow more people to work with it, and to bring functional parts of code together in logical chunks. However, as with most corporate development, marketing demanded deadlines and releases, creating a conflict between 'what's possible' and 'what's required'. Much of this restructuring work was only partially finished when the company shut down in 2002. The sources that were released in october 2002 were actually a 'snapshot' of an intermediate state of development, explaining quite some of the confusement people have with the code.
this basically tells that the opening of the code came at a point development was facing the big challenge of adding features to a messy ( C ) code base not ready to support them, thus requiring a major refactoring,
and the fact the company "shut down" amidst that refactoring most likelty indicates they couldnt commercially sustain the development of a software that a few people cared about as a commercial product, and a commercial software with such inherent low expandibility ( which is considered one aspect of sane design and engineering methodologies btw )
that they have decided to put such an application ( obviously still written in C - and with an interface that may appeal programmers -uhm, where have i heard this before?...- abut apparently scares 3d artists away -http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=35452&cid=3829796 ) out in the open to appease to the "community" and let others continue the work, is evident
For the not-so pretty interface with roots in Unix widget sets (Motif?), try Maya.
and of course and that nice results are obtaiable with blender - but it strikes me a lot, that reknown blender- made movies to date, seem to ones from indipendent studios aapparently made with the purpose of showcasing blender's capabilities
i mean, perhaps i've lived in an unvoluntary insolation i havent even realized myself - but i've not yet heard of any CG blockbuster by Pixar or DreamCast entirely and proudly "made with Blender"
they usually go with Maya or other tools because they usually allow better results and workflow integration for large scale projects , am i wrong?
Maya: i have directly seen Maya in action using it and watching others use it proficiently - nonetheless there's no need to go straight to it - better, in order to surpass what is possible ( in terms of modelling and animation) on blender
Houdini, Cinema4D, Realsoft4D ( which you may recall), all of them do, all of them have a better and more flexible not just GUI, rather architecture - Realsoft4D works in such a way that any object, material or phisycal property can influence any>/i> other - and elastic surface deformation has been directly visible in the editor ( useful for interfactive adjustment , staging or even modeling by positioning force fields ) for a very long time - and RS4D v6 only costs € 200 for linux
but indeed , suggesting Maya as if nothing else existed just proves Maya's "de facto industrial standard" status - not unlike that of Photoshop when it comes to image processing ;-)
Of course. They have already made huge investments, both in terms of money AND in terms of effort, Blender would offer them NO benefit, who in their right mind would switch? Another point - when I watch, say, Shrek, I really don't care about the software it was made with, or what CPUs do they use at the render farm (or what OS. or how long did it take to render it.). This is nothing but trivia for the viewer (well, I am curious, but frankly I don't care much)
About Maya: I actually wrote a couple of plugins for it (custom format exporters), about 5 years ago. I hate its UI (well, there are worse apps, much worse, but still).
Suggesting Maya proves that 1) I used to work with it 2) I do not like Maya UI (artists I worked with loved Maya and hated Max, whereas I didn't really enjoy Maya API or UI, Max UI looks much cleaner)
In any event, Blender is one of the better FOSS apps.
Pixar is also a software company, they develop their own 3d modeller and rendering technology, if they were to adopt an externally developed modeling or animation tool I would be very surprised.
People automatically link Open Source to Linux. Even that the numbers say clearly otherwise. Lot of people from all OS's hate blenders interface.
Learn to blame the correct user base. Blender is not the only option for Linux. Its a rage with windows and mac and linux users because its cheep. More of a rage if it ever gets a simpler and more powerful interface. I am sorry to say Maya's interface sux's more than blenders. That really does take doing. Softimage at least has a decent interface so if I was to spend the money it would be there.
Note softimage and maya both have Linux versions. It is nothing more than a cost factor.
if you haven't already .. which would be the case if you are a true redditor ..
But you know, the strangest thing is that I really AM starting to see the point of "build everything" distros like Gentoo. Sure, its painful, but at least you can be sure everything is consistent (well, at least in theory, as I suspect in practice its much harder then configure / make / install)
Ports is a truly magnificent system. Binary packages and source builds integrated into each other, you can perform binary upgrades to source builds, or source upgrades to binary installs, use binary packages as deps for source builds and vice versa, no conflicts. All the deps are in the tree, everything is tested and is sure to build. They're actually ports (ported to FreeBSD), not just raw, upstream source. Granted, I like some of the niceties added to Portage such as pretend builds and version slotting, but the flexibility and stability of Ports far outweighs the usefulness of such features.
Solves binary incompatibility problems too I guess.
when will that lie cease !
In the U.S. it means either:
A. A sex slave used in s&m
B. A derogatory term for someone who is missing a limb
Just use ubuntu and gimp!
Now there's a catchy slogan. Instead of Windows, use this African tribesman and a sex slave.
Once that's done, the "community" can convince you of anything - it can make you believe the turds it produces are diamonds, and that Richard Stallman isn't an escaped mental patient.
O'Brien: What are your feelings towards Richard Stallman?
Winston Smith: I hate him.
O'Brien: You must love him. It is not enough to obey him. You must love him.
Stallman tells his followers what to think, what they may say, how they may say it, how they must run their businesses, what they are permitted to sell, who they are permitted to sell to, what they must not have, and more.
The sad part is, Stallman only became a famous public masturbator when Linus publicly gave away the code to his kernel. If Linus didn't do this, but instead only gave away the binaries, Stallman would still be working on his broken "GNU Hurd" kernel, and the only people who would have to listen to his rantings are his parents.
Travelling from Shanghai or Beijing to Boston in the next few days? Can you help us by bringing a small package? campaigns@fsf.org
Obviously the FSF's MacAttack on Apple stores has met with such a backlash that they're resorting to drug running to shore up donations!
Please don't use “commercial” as a synonym for “non-free.” That confuses two entirely different issues.
A program is commercial if it is developed as a business activity. "
Isn't windows and most non-free software developed as a business. I mean as long as business still means trying to make some money from your work by selling something.
And there's also this strange notion that running an MS System is mutually exclusive with open-source. The strange thing is that the most reliable parts I've seen in Linux desktops come from closed software ... and the best open-source SW you can get are those which can be run on Windows. Strange.
There is a comparison between what thecodewitch wrote and 1984. thecodewitch said:
Dignity and self respect is the first feature you must learn to do without as a linux user.
In part 3 of 1984 (see the summary), Winston is broken and humiliated by the Inner Party man O'Brien. Like the FOSS user, he too lost his dignity and self-respect. Ostensibly FOSS programs are given stupid names for the same reason Winston is tortured: to break the individual down, to open them up to suggestion, to allow them to double-think.
thecodewitch hits the nail on the head with this:
Once that's done, the "community" can convince you of anything - it can make you believe the turds it produces are diamonds, and that Richard Stallman isn't an escaped mental patient.
From 1984:
You believe that reality is something objective, external, existing in its own right. You also believe that the nature of reality is self evident. When you delude yourself into thinking that you see something, you assume that everyone else sees the same thing as you. But I tell you Winston, that reality is not external. Reality exists in the human mind, and nowhere else. Not in the individual mind, which can make mistakes, and in any case soon perishes: only in the mind of the party, which is collective and immortal. Whatever the party holds to be truth, is truth. It is impossible to see reality except by looking through the eyes of the Party. That is the fact that you have got to re-learn, Winston. It needs an act of self destruction, an effort of the will. You must humble yourself before you can become sane.
Frankly, the only question that remains, is just how much like the Party are the Free Software Foundation? Remember, the sole purpose of the party is power: The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power.
Am not saying there is some conspiracy by Stallman to take over the world. Just that FOSS is typically very Stalinist in nature. Right down to the imagined enemies, and made-up statistics they use to pat themselves on the back.
Try putting it in a sentence: "My PC is running the GNU Hurd" What comes next? How about "Now my PC is broken, and it smells like nerd sweat and manure"
Yes, the interface is attrocious.
But it's the lack of 16-bit and 32-bit colour depths, the lack of CMYK colour space, the lack of colour-matching, the lack of Pantone support, the lack of at the very least half-decent colour-management, the lack of support for large (think 250,000 x 250,000 px) images, and the lack of a whole slew of other useful features present in pretty much, only Photoshop that sinks Gimp.
You aren't trying anything new with Gimpshop, all you're getting is the same half-asses Gimp with a shitty MDI interface slapped onto it, and with buttons moved, and features renamed the _LOOK_ like Photoshop.
Cue the "omgomg Gimp is good enough for 99.9% of people" bullshit, because you know,. freetards like to think they're even remotely in touch with what normal, sane people want or need, or that their delusion at any point intersects with reality., While we're at it, cue the attempt to convince me, or any other user of Photoshop, for that matter, that we don't really need all of those high end features anyway. And don't even bother mentioning GeGL, that's been in development for what, almost as long as HURD, and still doesn't even offer a beta release?
At least save some face and argue in favour of Krita, which in spite of its dependemncy on KDE, at the very least supports CMYK colour spaces (which is still fairly useless without decent colour-management and no support for Pantone), and 16-bit colour-depth, which that being said, is still a long way from being useful, but is leaps and bounds ahead of Gimp. Still, nobody actually needs any of that, right?
BTW, I think you are being unfair, Photoshop isn't a shitty MID interface.
Note when I say "print", I don't mean your shitty desktop inkjet, I'm talking industrial silkscreen presses, and industrial sublimated dye presses.
The money I make from actually being able to do colour-matching, and working directly in CMYK (note: silkscreen printing presses work exclusively in four-colour process, CMYK specifically, and more specifically, using Pantone spot colours (since when you're doing work for government institutions, certain emblems, flags for example, by legislation, require specific Pantone colours), well, not only is Photoshop well worth it's pricetag, it's an inestment, and one which has payed itself off over and over again. Also worth mentioning, is that Photoshop CS3 Extended goes for $160 with student discount.
You get what you pay for, I guess. I can tell you straight up, that if I was working with Gimp, I'd be out of a job, given that I'd have to turn down 99.9% (and I'm being generous, here!) of my contracts, simply because of how much of what is required for the work being done just isn't possible in Gimp.
+1 Funny on the "works for me (tm)" reply.
+3 Funny on the smug attitude. Gimp satisfies you? Good for you, you evidently are neither a graphic designer, nor working in print. I do both, save your smug attitude for someone else.
Next version major verison of gimp will have CMYK. Ok you could also go Krita.
GImp is a classic case of media seeing something and over marketing it to the better tools out there.
The worst part of Gimp's marketting, is that it's actually pitched as already having CMYK support, in that it essentially opens CMYK images, as8-bit RGB, which is pretty useless.
Pantone support is unlikely to ever be included into either project due to it being proprietary, which limits both their usefulness considerably, due to the whole being not only the industry standard, but also a standard by legislation.
CinePaint is certainly interesting, and certainly has potential, but its Windows port is far from useable, and the interface is even more attrocious than Gimp's. It's enhanced featureset, however, is largely targetted at film retouching, and it's pretty good at that, but Photoshop is targetted at print and graphic design (also film editing, with CS3 extended), and that does make a difference.
Congrats on the most incomprehensible sentence posted on this board thus far. Why would one software application be marketed to another software application?
Simple fact some really useful tools of Open Source have got Zero press coverage. Yet stuff like gimp got tones.
Really LH could have a party pulling apart bad marketing.
IM becomes useful for large collections of images outside of that workflow, or for mass resizing camera dumps, since it's more convenient that loading hundreds of images into Photoshop (but Photoshop can be scripted to load images on at a time, anyway), so why bother with IM at all?
IM's strength is is it's language bindings, works well for automatically generated or manipulated images on the fly on the server end, via perl (eww), python, or PHP, since who's going to install PS on a server?
I'll agree with that last point, though, there are some OSS gems out there.
failOnMoreThanOneLevel();
Strangely I disagree, once you go to C2D, 2Gb DDR2 and a Video card after 2000, it doesn't matter what OS you go to, XP and Vista will perform the same, and Linux still sucks if you use a newer graphic card of any kind.
2. Rights & Limitations: Unlike Vista, Linux doesn’t restrict how content is used on a system.
Strange, haven't noticed, VLC and WinAmp haven't told me I can't play a song or watch a video file yet.
3. There is no Linux Genuine Advantage!
In Vista it auto activates once it reaches the net, put in a serial during the install, or do as I did, slipstream it in right on the DVD, and it have never bothered me.
4. Security Issues: You can never miss out on this. Anti-virus and anti-spyware applications are mandatory on Vista machines to prevent things getting worse, unlike Linux boxes where you essentially need not have one.
As said earlier, there ain't a better anti virus for any system then "Common Sense™®", guess I'm lucky not having had a virus on my system since I got "Common Sense™®", (Nod32 as fail safe, but not needed it seems).
Secondly, spyware and malware seems to have a hard time running/getting in on my machine, guess
Firefox and "Common Sense™®" is too much for it? (I check now and then with Spybot S & D and Windows Defender, still haven't got spyware on a single Vista installation, using it for 8 months now).
5. You name it, you have it! The increasing number of available applications for Linux have made it easier to get away from the propriety Windows applications.
Right, you mean the increasing number of badly copied, programmed and implemented applications form Windows have made it a "horribly and dreadfully experience" to suffer, besides, the three applications named in the article as examples are all cross platform and works just as good on Windows, (In Firefox case, works better on Windows).
Well that's it folks, let's all throw our Windows CD's/DVD's and license stickers in a pile and burn it while we dance around it, intoxicated by "freedom", both in form of code and a non named ideology , knowing we're surely not controlled by any corporation now!
1) Do not try to mistake the argument that a computer MUST have a C2D, 2Gb DDR2 RAM or similar to run Vista good, in fact, in my experience any CPU will do as long as you have at least 1Gb DDR2 RAM, video card limitation still apply to something created this millennium.
3) I work at times with fixing computer, and guess what the one thing I haven't had to do that I had to do with XP? Activating Windows, it have never failed me, unlike the XP machines, where I at times had to fight WGA.
Secondly, I know my argument at point 2, 3 and 4 is "works for me", but let's face it, unlike in Linux, it's not a bitch to fix, and doesn't require hours of searching Google or *genericdistroname*forums.org for a possible, half arsed fix, why? Because most know someone who knows something about computers and software, and in 95% of the cases that would be Windows as software.
LinuxHater's blog has been visited by linux fundies and fanboys before. Up until now, they have presented some semblance of a coherent argument based on their fanboyism, even if that argument was blasted to bits.
But this fuckhead.... this is a whole new level of linux fundamentalist. Not a single thing in this comment makes the slightest bit of sense, yet here it sits, looking vaguely like an argument, yet as approachable as a turd.
Linux Hater has levelled up!! Or is this just the end of level boss? In any case, bring out the doom cannons!! And a shovel.
The Firefox installation is x86, at least that's what my task manager tells me.
About the DRM enchanced content, that's a bit hard as I don't buy it (I hate DRM as much as anyone else!), but I have several times though been able to help other with circumventing the DRM protecting by telling them to download and install WinAmp/VLC and play it there, (granted, I have to admit some have reported that WinAmp sometimes complain about the DRM!).
About my lettering writing software, I got it through school (Office 2007), (you know, colleges sometimes give out stuff like that to their students!).
I find that instead of living with problems I can pay for them to go away, I sometimes do that instead of fighting with the performance issues of OO or the problem of editing transparent layers in GIMP.
I don't do DRM content either. It's amazing how both sides can claim DRM as a plus. (At least on XYZ I can buy DRMed content VS at least I am not silly enough to buy DRMed content).
OO however I hate, it's buggy, slow and tedious to work with, I've got to go with MS Office there, GimpShop haven't been very much better either, but it's an improvement of GIMP if you ask me.
(And DRM sucks, no matter what anyone says, do as I do, don't fucking buy it).
* Templates
* Cliparts with draws, photos and 3D objects
* Fonts
* Samples
* User documentations
* DataMiner tools for WikiPedia
* VBA macro support in Calc
* Enhanced palettes for color, hatching, gradient and other palettes
* New and updated import filters like Office Open XML (Microsoft Office 2007), Works, WordPerfect, WordPerfect Graphic, T602 import filters
* Enhanced SVG inport capabilities
* Improved EMF rendering
* Enhanced performance
* Calc solver
* Gstreamer multimedia integration for Linux operating systems
* 3D Impress effects for Linux (Windows support arrives in 3.0)
* And many more smaller improvements
The combination of Gimp and Krita (has CYMK, HDR, 16/32-bit channels, adjustment layers, etc) will solve the lack of Photoshop. Although, its easy enough just to install Photoshop in Wine.
Wow, what I've always wanted!! I've been dreaming of merging my open source "software" with my open source "reference material", that way, I can entrust my whole life to the wisdom and good judgment of the open source "community".
You are so caught up with impudent remarks towards anything FOSS that you're beginning to sound just like those you despise--the the ultra-fanatical FOSS zealots.
I found myself talking to anyone who would listen about Linux, and offered to burn them Live CDs. I showed people the spinning cube. (In my defense though, when people asked me if I recommended going completely to Linux, I told them that's a definite no.)
Now I still use Linux to an extent, but I'm nowhere near as enthusiastic about it as I was.
I even imagined using it on the home server. But with Windows working so well for that I can't bring myself to trash a perfectly fine system that I don't even log into for months at a time just to have headaches with reconfiguring my file sharing, remote network backups (using robocopy ATM), and finding some decent tape backup software.
If it ain't broke...
There are other cross-platform Office suites as well, such as SoftMaker Office and KOffice.
For anyone else, I recommend making use of the DirectShow architecture and installing ffdshow so that ALL your programs will support ALL the codecs.
Its not perfect by any means, but it has a lot of features i need/want.
They're the "God Hates Fags" assholes of the tech world.
I never thought I'd thank a flamebate blogger but yeah...
I've had that problem as well and used user-agent switcher to solve it (not sure why this method works). But it looks like I can just block that specific swf with flashblock.
This problem most certainly is related to the "transparency" issue with the Linux FlashPlayer implementation. This issue affects other websites as well but
Adobe is well aware of the issue and working to fix it but progress is very slow.
http://ploum.frimouvy.org/?194-hardy-is-a-hard-...
However, harassing the 'Geniuses' at the Apple Store is pretty stupid, and I'm not sure entirely what the FSF is trying to accomplish with this particular stunt. My issue with DRM is more of one of accessibility to media in the long term (look at Yahoo! shutting down it's DRM server) than anything else though. Not that the issue of freedom to use media per copyright's original intent isn't important to me, but it's not as important as accessibility over time.
The FSF has always been over the top. This doesn't necessarily invalidate their views, but I do really wish that they'd learn to approach problems from a more reasonable direction. A part of me wants to say that the FSF will back off when Stallman is out of the picture, but these days, I'm just not sure that's true.
Go 'review' kde4.1 or something, stop wasting time with this garbage.
That website almost makes me wish I worked in Apple Tech Support (Crazy I know...) so I could slap the tool audacious enough to bring that crap in.
Don't harass the staff by showing off your inner nerd, they're just trying to work damnit.
BTW, I just got an iPod Touch, and I love DRM... and I love proprietary software. It works great. This is one of the coolest devices ever invented.
It's a shame though, since Vorbis is actually one one the few gems to come out of FOSS. Higher quality at the same size, smaller size for the same bitrate, as compared to MP3. FLAC is also a rare gem, for recording/composition, anyway. 60% the size of raw waveform, without loss of quality.
I don't give two shits about them being open "standards" (AHAHA "standard"!), mind you, just that they're convenient and they work.
I love my iPod, too ^^;;
And I don't really have a problem with content providers wanting to safeguard their content from being stolen, so yeah, go DRM.
Didn't Sprint of someone start having major financial troubles, in part due to subscriber defections? I suggest Citibank take a page from that playbook.
Love Linux or hate it, a desktop doesn't get any cooler than that.
Software Boss: So you're telling me that Linus can break our application at any time through a kernel update? Do you realize what a support nightmare that could create? And you're telling me that we should accept this risk and port for what, 1% of desktop users?
Linux employee: Did you see the pretty fish on my desktop? Can Vista do that?
Software Boss: Get the hell back in your server closet before I fire you.
I didn't watch the whole video because flash sound wasn't working in my ubuntu hardy install. Seems to be a common problem:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=767124
Oh well, I guess I having sound working in flash isn't that important. Good thing we have virtual desktops.
I also noticed that after running GNUminesweepX I have to reboot because Linux can be easily confused by two sound sources. Oh well, I guess only being able to have one sound source isn't a big deal. At least I don't have to pay $100 for vista like all those suckers, right?
Maybe after I recompile the kernel later tonight everything will be working. Hopefully by tomorrow night I will be able to watch a youtube video.
They're helpful to have, of course, but people need to stop pimping them up as though they're something new or unique. (Personally, I've always prefered having my desktop stretched accross multihead setups, rather than using multiple virtual screens on a single head, mind you).
The cube isn't unique, either. Here's an example of the one of many cube effects for XP and Vista: http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windows-vista/an...
And here's a panoramic desktop on Vista: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7NRqfn4uQI
Oh, and there's Sun's Project Looking Glass, as well, http://www.sun.com/software/looking_glass/
Also, just a heads up, cubes have six sides :p
My cube on my desktop has a waterfall image on them, as does the cube surround. Very cool.
The links you posted are cool, but hardly mainstream. Compiz is included standard and during install, it asks you if you want it (at least Mandriva), so it gets a lot more exposure.
They have their uses, having editors open in one vd, browser in the other, etc. I dunno, though, like I said, I'm always prefered having my desktop span accross multiple physical monitors, 4800 x 1200 resolution, ftw!
@TrippleII
Linux is hardly mainstream either (with all of its 0.8% of the market), but that's besides the point. These things aren't included in a base windows install because they aren't really needed, nor in demand, most of the people who complain about them not being part of the base install are people coming over from Linux (people coming from other Unices, just google it up, and find that you can add them in with little effort).
Professional OS that'll get your work done, but can be made into a toy if you so choose, is much better marketting "toy OS that can supposedly be turned into something useful".
Truth is a mainstream OS targeting professionals, e.g. Windows or OS X doesn't need 3D cube effects by default. Thedy aren't really trying to win anyone over with the "omg candy!" Generally people who see these tech demos on youtube, rarely actually switch to linux, they'll google it up and find a bubch of results and go for it.
Then there's the issue of fosstards arguing that the eye candy in compriz is "productive eye candy" which is bullshit. Wobbly windows increase productivity, and peeling back a window to peek at what's underneath, well, really, takes less effort to enter a three key combo to set transparency on the active window, and you don't need a fancy cube to do that (also availible on Windows, through third party apps), but then again, what do I know, I'm ther guy with three 1600x1200 monitors and screen realestate to spare...
I also find it funny how (certain) foss projects go on about how they don't want nor need users, but it always comes down to mentioning the new UI, or Compriz, when really, that's who the fancy cubes attract
I honestly don't understand why can't I just use the taskbar to manage open windows
"What's the point of using desktop cube than if your taskbar stays crowded because your WM interprets all 4 virtual desktops as one."
Again, configurable, you can set up your taskbar to show current desktop or all desktops.
I'm not sure how you think this is a ripoff? It's free.
Anyway, like it or hate it, that is one cool desktop.
"I've watched these youtube videos myself and concluded that effects like this clearly show..."
There's the rub, never tried, but an expert. I'd like to know what effects you think Compiz stole from Linux. You do know that the Vista clock and some Apple widgets were lifted directly from Karumba right?
TripleII
One of the other things you see on "the video itself" is glitches. I have them in Compiz too and it compensates your organized overview with a nice headache after working with it. Another thing I experienced with this eye-candy is a flash of blackness, followed by pieces of the programs disappearing (mostly the top meny bar). Also, they have the tendency to lock up the screen after x amount of hours.
I know, I know, it'll get fixed.
You know, you know, that's a lie.
Its free, its light, it runs on anything. No fish and wobbly windows though.
Come on, LH! Post moar!!
(I also hate linux for making me post in 4chan style)
I hate MS, during years their O.S. was imposed to users... I wanted to buy a Notebook without O.S., so I could install whatever I liked, but they told me that the price included the S.O., so they weren't going to do anything about it....
Speaking for myself, I don't hate anyone or anything, really. Hate implies emotion. I simply don't care about Linux and most FOSS software. I've used it, I've worked with it, and, given a choice, I would use commercial solutions such as OSX and Windows any day. My time is too valuable to waste fucking around with crappy software..
I hate MS, during years their O.S. was imposed to users...
Get counseling. Hating anything isn't healthy.
I wanted to buy a Notebook without O.S., so I could install whatever I liked, but they told me that the price included the S.O., so they weren't going to do anything about it....
Waaaaaaaaaaah! Tell me something, Hate Boy ... do you whine and cry because you can't buy a new car without an engine? A new cell phone from your carrier without an OS? A router without an embedded OS? No, of course you don't. But, somehow, because it's a computer, you whine and pout like a fucking pussy over the lack of choicccccccccccccc thrust upon you by the seller. Fuck you. The market isn't looking for computers without operating systems. Get a fucking clue: Mothers and sisters and uncles and grandmothers don't install operating systems. If you want to do that, fine. Do it. But the market is what it is, and trying to suggest that MS and sellers deserve HATE because they don't bend to your narrow interests in just the height of delusional narcissism. My advice: Fuck yourself.
Get counseling. Hating anything isn't healthy."
This website is called the Linux Hater's Blog, and its motto is: "We Hate Linux. And You Should Too." So are you telling the Linux Hater to get counseling as well?
And a lot of roasting of the foss community in general.
Yes, the "MS tax" annoys us too. We have a licensing agreement with MS for the division that covers our XP workstations and server CALs, and yet we cannot buy PCs from our short list of approved vendors sans OS.
Though on the flip side, should the agreement not be renewed for whatever reason, we won't be scrambling to get legal.
Like it or not, MS Windows on the PC platform is the standard, and nothing short of a meterorite impacting Redmond is going to change that, let alone wishful thinking.
On my personal machines at home it's a different story. I've been mostly Windows. Whenever I have tried to use some flavor of Linux the installation has always been a pain in the ass, even when it worked eventually. With non-existent or incomprehensible documentation, incompatibility between the distro and the key application I want to run, and those godawful forums for help, I never had a Linux box up for long. Did I mention how much I hate X-windows on Linux?
Recently I wanted to resurrect an old laptop with limited memory to run Audacity in a GUI. That's the only app, nothing else. I tried various small linux distros, some of which crapped out, others hung, others almost got to a working installation before they crashed. Eventually I gave up, installed an old copy of Windows 98, a Windows version of Audacity, and was happily running in under an hour. The Linux bullshit ate up 3 days before I gave up.
Unfortunately Microsoft is sticking its nose into my business on my home machine a little too much, and it gets progressively worse. OS costs and hardware and software upgrade costs are getting way too expensive. Microsoft wants to know my system configuration which means if I modify my PC I have to convince them I really paid for my software before they'll let me use it. Their bigfooting all over my video and audio playback with their stupid DRM is also annoying as hell. It's like the bad old Paleolithic computing days of security dongles and hardware keys.
At some point I may have to grit my teeth and go Linux, just so I can tell Microsoft to get out of my business and kiss my ass. That's gonna suck.
Regarding Microsoft getting expensive, this is my solution: Windows 2000 SP4 + Visual Studio C++ Express. Cheap, lean and easy, and runs on anything.
http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley/mini.html
"After many adventures (including kdebluetooth getting my system in a state where no input devices of any kind worked at all), I finally decided linux needs another few years of bluetooth experience. I could make the Mini work, but I constantly had to manually connect, which sort of put a crimp in the kicking back across the room experience."
That's the solution to everything in Linux, the infinite number of monkeys working away in the Bazaar with their (non-Bluetooth) keyboards adding one-line kernel patches for another couple of years till it finally works... until it breaks again.
He donated money to a .NET open-source project. It was about whether or not money was useful to this type of project. You not only misrepresented his post, you also failed at making some sort of point about Linux. Last I checked, .Net doesn't run well (if at all) on any Linux platform.
Although, some money can help FOSS, giving money to people who doesn't know where to put, also hurts. It'll just turn into one of the dev's basement DragonflyBSD hobby test machine.
Not ALL of the money needs to be spent wisely in order for some of it to be effective. Just take a look at the relationships between Microsoft, OEMs, IHVs, and ISVs -- and you can see that money is well-spent there. The ecosystem is pretty tightly integrated, there's a broad availability of drivers, compatibility between releases is better, etc.
*sigh*
What kind of release is KDE4.1 anyway, is it an alpha or a beta? How are we supposed to know? Does anyone know? More to the point, does anyone at KDE know?
This blog sucks. You are boring.
PS: I use Linux and I love it.
Good day.
2) What's wrong with bikini clad women!?
3) Flash problem, much ado about nothing. Interesting tech support folk comments though.
4) Again, see #2, what's wrong with women!? I like em personally.
5) Imagine that, not needing the money so not using it. They should just break the law and spend it willy nilly. Talk about immoral.
6) Yeah, the same reasons (who cares that they are valid) keep coming up over and over again. DRM enforcement, overblown, besides, all those Yahoo's who bought from Yahoo Music, suck it up for the team, rebuy! You will be doing the American economy a service. Only lusers think they own their music forever, or their computers, or their movies, or peripherals. Bunch of commies if you ask me.
This infantile, clueless, sexist tool seems to confuse the act of working with women on a project, and wanking to porn. Morons post comments like "show us pix", in an article about women in linux, and you think women should be comfortable with this? You say you "like em personally" - I disagree. You don't like real women. Your only experience with them is porn and your right hand.
Unsurprisingly, this is a common attitude among linux dweebs and open source fundies, whose view of reality consists of themselves and what they think the rest of the world owes them. When idiots like this see a woman programmer on the web, they ask for "pix". However, when idiots like this see a woman programmer in real life, they shit themselves, get their asses handed to them by someone 10 times smarter than them, then shit themselves again.
If you really want to get angry, read this shit
Always fun to welcome new linux fanboy blood. We need to feed. Linux Hater has stopped posting and we're all starting to get restless in here.
Blood, bloooood!!!
oh, sorry, wrong forum.
Look, douchebag, you may think that browse pr0n with Linux makes you l33t, but your toy OS is just that -- a toy -- and until it solves some fundamental problems -- (1) inadequate driver support (wireless, video, camera, webcam, video capture, and many other drivers), (2) print output looks like ass, (3) X windows is a code museum, (4) Linux has no games that anyone wants to play, (5) Linux lacks apps that professionals use (MSOffice, Photoshop, etc -- and don't even try to shove any of that Wine shit, it crashes constantly), (6) the Linux development tools SUCK ASS compared to commercial solutions on other platforms (Xcode, Visual Studio), (6) inconsistent, unstable, unusable crapware apps -- Linux is going to remain nothing more than a Group Masturbatorium for socially-regressed geeks.
and Macs are too expensive.
Clue phone: You really DO get what you pay for. Dust off your wallet. Oh, right. You still live with mommy and daddy in their basement, right? Fuck you.
I am not sure what OS you dumbasses want everyone to use.
It's simple: Use a commercial OS that works. Namely, WIndows or Mac OSX.
Linux is the best OS out of the three.
See above, jerkwad. Linux SUCKS BALLS.
Maybe you should all stop using computers so we will be spared from this retarded blog and it's worshipers.
Dude, the beauty of using an OS like Windows and OSX is that most of us have plenty of time left over to do other things -- things that you wouldn't know about, like getting laid, because you're too busy circle-jerking your l33t buddies on IRC or some weird fucking shit like that.
If you can't even admit that your OS has problems, get counseling. You're fucking delusional.
(2) - Prints just fine here
(3) - 1994 called, they want their joke back. OSX is probably the only OS with a marginally new code base.
(4) - Linux has games. Commercial games. They are not a lot, but they do exist, unlike your pathetic logic.
(5) - Can't argue with that though. OOo is getting there, but the gimp ... Wine isn't a good solution, but it doesn't 'crash', no matter what bullshit you spew.
(6) - Me, and millions of other professional software developers would beg to differ.
Linux definetely isn't the best thing since sliced bread. Doesn't suck balls though, you do. And I know that you can say whatever you want here, but don't say obvious lies. You are too busy looking and installing drivers, to get 'laid' (which in your terms means looking at porn)
Windows doesn't suffer from this problem. Hardware manufacturers actively target Windows. Whether you consider it Linux's "problem" is irrelevant. People don't care about whose fault it is when they can't use their hardware.
(2) - Prints just fine here
Rrrrright. Just don't try anything that you would have done easily on Windows, like scaling output, N-up printing, back-to-front, printing odd/even pages only, double-sided print, embedded ICC profiles -- in short, the kinds of things that professional offices do -- and you might as well boot Windows and get the job done.
(3) - 1994 called, they want their joke back. OSX is probably the only OS with a marginally new code base.
And how the fuck, exactly, does that make X Windows any less shitty? I'll answer for you: It doesn't. X is slow, and has stood in the way of modernizing desktop composition under Linux. X should be pulled out of the primary graphics stack and just be layered on top of it.
(4) - Linux has games. Commercial games. They are not a lot, but they do exist, unlike your pathetic logic.
Oh, puh-lease. The only games on Linux are pathetic also-ran FPS games that are no better than vintage 1998 Windows games.In other words, games that nobody wants to play.
(5) - Can't argue with that though. OOo is getting there, but the gimp ... Wine isn't a good solution, but it doesn't 'crash', no matter what bullshit you spew.
At least we agree.
(6) - Me, and millions of other professional software developers would beg to differ.
Eclipse and similar IDEs are slow and unstable. If you've ever used Xcode or Visual Studio, you would just admit that Linux tools suck by comparison, and we could move on.
(2) We were discussing common usage of linux. Normal printing works just fine. The rest, as you said, falls into professional printing. And with my comment on the gimp, I think that we already closed the chapter on how useful it is there.
(3) Oh yeah! Well I say X is fast! It did prevent modernization during the XFree era. It's a different picture now. Still waiting to hear exactly WHY X is supposed to be slow.
(4) The previous comment said that there were no games. I don't care if no one wants to play them. I don't play games myself, but they do exist, thus proving the GP's comment wrong. No go all political on me how the games suck and all. I'll promise to care.
(6) I've used Visual Studio, and I didn't find it to my liking. I've heard great things about Xcode though. That being said, I am personally a vim user, and use it for all projects big and small. Visual Studio can't hold a candlelight to vim. So no, linux tools do not suck and we can move on. Some of my colleagues (especially the java guys) use eclipse under Windows. They haven't complained that it is unstable or slow. Others use emacs, and are also quite productive. Now start screaming at me how vim and emacs are old and obsolete, please.
As opposed to at the pro-linux sites where even the smallest criticism gets you nailed to a cross.
Nice, isn't it? :)
If some piece of weird hardware doesn't work on Windows(XP) then it's also old-as-dirt hardware or shitty hardware made by a one shot wonder manufacturer who has been out of business for a good few years.
If it doesn't work under Vista, then it's on the fast track to becomming obsolete hardware and the vendor can't be bothered to support it any more (where's the profit in it?)
The driver debate is tiresome. Windows has a massive driver base in its own right, but the Microsoft model has always been to provide a basic platform for the hardware and let the hardware vendors deal with supporting their own product. The ONLY reason Linux has such decent built in hardware support is because if the community didn't provide those drivers NO ONE would (outside of the very few vendors that we all know). If hardware vendors were to actually want to support the OS then that would not be necessary - though of course the *nix crowd would spaz out at any closed source driver and continue to push their own crappy ones anyway.
Printing does work well, though all I have ever hooked up to are network Laserjets, and any OS that doesn't have fantastic support for Laserjets is a real lost cause. The problem is finding the One Decent Driver when you have to choose between 5 or 6 different ones. There usually is one good one amoung several crap ones. I had an old Laserjet IIIP once and the (decent) linux driver was amazing. The floyd-steinberg dithering option gave the 300DPI printer output that looked like it came from a 600DPI Laserjet 4.
Yeah that's a great way to make us take you seriously.
Oh, right. You still live with mommy and daddy in their basement, right? Fuck you.
My business runs on Linux, and in the office where the missus works they use a mixture of Mac and Linux. She also uses it at home.Yeah, it's the Works for Me(tm) argument, a valid counter in this case as your belief is that Linux cannot work for anyone.
I don't give a fuck what OS you choose to use, if Linux doesn't Work for You(tm) then don't use it. But don't think you can order everyone else on the planet around, that makes you just as bad as the FOSStards.
If you can't even admit that your OS has problems, get counseling. You're fucking delusional.
This is the only sensible point, in an otherwise idiotic post. There are many ways in which Linux is as shit as fuck.
You forgot to mention that the interfaces (or interfaeces in the case of KDE4) of many FOSS apps are horribly designed; that the only productivity suite is slow, bloated and run by a bunch of bureaucratic dullards (check out how they handled the OTF support bugs, they make my local council look efficient); and inadequate support for multiple monitors and other display devices (projectors for example). Not sure about the dev tools, you should probably include a reason why Eclipse is shit compared to Xcode or Visual Studio. Personally I found it too bloated and went back to Vim, but most people prefer an IDE (so I'm not a good one to judge).
On the other hand, I certainly don't care for what Mr Gates has said above. Just popping up and throwing around a few generalisations and ad-hominems isn't going to help his case, or Free software in general.
1. slow
2. unstable - crashes a lot when the VM is out of memory
3. terrible handling of multiple projects.
4. lacking in features .
Here's a Gnome developer account:
http://www.j5live.com/2008/06/25/eclipse-lose-n...
http://www.j5live.com/2008/07/30/an-update-on-e...
Please note that Eclipse is the best IDE for Linux, with Anjuta, Kdevelop, codeblocks etc. far behind in term of features and usability.
As a personal preference - when handling big project (more than a few files), IDEs are (IMHO) far more efficient tools than simple editors. when writing a one-line microprograms, I rather use an editor, since there's no overhead of project management/ configuration. That's why I keep Linux around -in a virtual machine.
Fuck you. I never said that it "cannot meet anybody's" expectations. If you have low expectations, I'm sure that it would work fine for you.
Yeah, it's the Works for Me(tm) argument, a valid counter in this case as your belief is that Linux cannot work for anyone.
See above, Mr Underachiever.
I don't give a fuck what OS you choose to use, if Linux doesn't Work for You(tm) then don't use it. But don't think you can order everyone else on the planet around, that makes you just as bad as the FOSStards.
Keep flogging that strawman...
You forgot to mention that the interfaces (or interfaeces in the case of KDE4) of many FOSS apps are horribly designed, blah, blah, blah...
No, I didn't: "(6) inconsistent, unstable, unusable crapware apps".
Not sure about the dev tools, you should probably include a reason why Eclipse is shit compared to Xcode or Visual Studio. Personally I found it too bloated and went back to Vim, but most people prefer an IDE (so I'm not a good one to judge).
WTF, do I really have to spell it out for you? It should be obvious to you -- particularly since you've used Eclipse -- it's slow, bloated, unusable crap.
.
Fuck you. I never said that it "cannot meet anybody's" expectations. If you have low expectations, I'm sure that it would work fine for you.
Read your own fucking post, that's exactly what you said.
Once again: don't fucking dictate to me what OS works for me. Fucking inverse FOSStard.
Quote the line(s) where you claim that I said it "cannot meet anybody's expectations."
You obviously come from the other side of the fence where freedom of thought and opinion ist verboten and dogma reigns.
No blinkered fanboys here, chum. They don't last long.
Of course, calling Linux the best OS out there just shows your level of expertise in these matters. I don't care for the Apple business model and I do not like Mac hardware and I don't care for MacOS. But even I, in my limited exposure to OSX (administrating a few iMacs), have seen that it, without a doubt, is both easier to install and easier to use than the popular Linux distros out there, is far far more stable than all but the most pedestrian Gnome desktops, has a well integrated set of core applications, good vendor support, and overall has one of the best end user experiences out there for everyday users.
I can freely admit that, even though I personally don't like it.
Now go back to your drum circle with RMS and eat each others hair, you poor deluded person.
You could be big, but you're too damn small-sighted to be big.
See ya...
Stopped reading there.
Poor guy.
Like a typical freetard, he moots his own point with the classic double negative.