-
Website
http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com -
Original page
http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/2008/07/my-browser-needs-16-exabytes.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
Except for most of these freetards 'society' means Slashdot and 'green light' mean +5 Insightful.
Over the years I've grown to understand it is less the actual open source developers and users but the enabling culture - most notably Slashdot.
The +5 Insightful Slashdot culture is what has turned open source software into the joke it is today and why this blog is such a rich and unending source of material.
The +5 Insightful Slashdot culture means open source will always:
* Freedom without responsibility - endless forks, endless duplication of effort, immediate gratification and publicity for every worthless 0.1 open source project that announces their 'big plans'
* Features over robustness - 3D spinning cubes over reliable, consistent and commercial level UI systems
* Blame over accountability - 'did you submit a patch', 'you're not paying for it, you can't complain', 'works for me', 'read the fucking manual'
All of that crap is enabled by the +5 Insightful culture on Slashdot.
This blog is blowing away a decade's worth of +5 Insightful posts. This blog is a wakeup call to open source. It's time to grow the fuck up. The computing world WANTS to use open systems and software. But it has no time for bullshit.
Make a choice open source:
* Grow the fuck up and start acting like adults and put in the hardwork commercial developers do every single day
* Sit around jerking each other off with +5 Insightful posts on Slashdot with BSOD jokes and how you are just about to take over the world and then right back to bong hits and World of Warcraft listening to your gigabytes of stolen copyright music(that is totally different than GPL copyright violations).
For instance all the CDs from the distros you've switched to every time you had a problem with linux and some luser tells you that that doesn't happen on [insert distro with even more problems here].
Don't get me wrong, I've tried and tried to love the ugly cunt that is Linux and it's fucktops but there looneys are running the farm now and as a developer nothing beats Windows 2008 + VS08 + SQL05. It all just works.
I quickly learned that if you dare to say anything unflattering about "FOSS", Mac hipsters, or software pirates, you are shouted down by zealots.
I'm also starting to become disillusioned with Linux. I've only been using it for a year, but I've gone through a dozen distros and spent countless hours learning to configure everything. I'm finding that I have less and less tolerance for fixing things, nor should I have to, whether the OS is free or not.
Just minutes ago I discovered another of Ubuntu's bugs, oops I mean "features." I was trying to use Virtualbox on my laptop, and when I start a VM the screen kept dimming on its own, numerous times. I of course had to boot into Windows (Vista!) to get anything done.
Now you're a part of it, MWAHAHA ;)
I've run everything from slackware in the late '90s to the debian etch that is running in the datacenter down the hall right now. In the beginning, it was a badge of geek pride to know that you were running a linux desktop. A bragging point, if you will. I, and many others that I hung around with, truly believed that we were somehow going to triumph over those evil capitalists in Redmond. I was also an avid poster on Slashdot. There were other people like me!
The thing is.. I grew up. I got out of school. I got a job. I got married and had a kid. I still used linux on my desk, but only for some automation tasks and on a small machine at the far end that was buried under some documentation and Cisco manuals. I found myself less and less interested in compiling anything that wasn't needed for my job directly, and more interested in just getting my work done so I could go home. My linux and FreeBSD machines at the house were eventually unplugged so my study would be quieter. Finally, my personal desktop machine was reformatted with XP.
It's not that I couldn't tweak the OS or use it for daily use. I could. I just didn't want to have to deal with dependencies, compiling things (other than my own code), and watching my desktop break on a regular basis due to some packaged repository brain-damage. Windows just worked for my daily music/internet needs. I bought a Mac Mini for coding. $500 for a pretty nice computer that always works, does everything I need it to, and has all the coding tools I could want all just an SSH away.
In the end.. I never stuck it to the man. In fact, Bill Gates has no idea who I am, nor should he care. Using linux doesn't do anything for my credentials as a human. I need tools to do the job. If one tool is better than another, then that is what I will use. It's really that easy. My time is worth too much to spend days tweaking config files and patching source so that I can get my sound to not suck.
Modern UNIX desktops are garbage. Gnome really hasn't changed at all. It is still so dumbed-down that just changing basic aesthetics requires downloading a .theme file that is "close enough" for most. KDE is so ugly it makes Windows 3.1 look hotter than a girl on prom night. XFCE.. well, I have no idea what they are trying to accomplish, and I suspect they don't either. Too much fighting and too many sub-par choices has killed off any hope for the desktop. Mac OSX has come along and shown what a UNIX desktop can look like, and "Ubuntu" is now the rallying cry for wanna-bes and group-think-geeks so desperate for validation they will do or say anything to propagate their tenuous grasp on reality.
In the end.. linux desktops were a fantastic social experiment, but it has become so marginalized and associated with fanboy zealotry, that even if the developers managed to make a UI that doesn't suck, no real end-users would want it just to avoid that stigma.
My linux servers in my datacenter run like a dream. They just work. I wish I could say the same for any desktop installation.
I guess I once was a fosstard too. Somehow you slip into this community that convinces you of the Linux-elitism, they make you think that you are über if you run their crapware. Although its such a small group, their propaganda is spread all over the web.
Luckily I got back to reality in my job, I learned to judge software by real-world requirements and not by its license or its fosstard-religion.
after time trying to make my other works in windows and getting in troubles i thought: hey, why not change to linux??? it seems quite a nice thing??? so i did and change everything to linux, but after few months of fighting against drivers and loose my time with that sort of stupid things instead of just really using and enjoying of my music, my photos, etc., i decided to find for a computer that just works!!
so there it was: OSX !!
it works, has a fantastic desktop, over a solid *NIX kernel (demonstrating that is possible make a good desktop for Linux), and every new gadget i add works fine with it...
but anyway i think we should be thankful to that Linux experiment, it has demonstrated that is possible to make a very good OS over a *NIX system basis, and if only ALL of the developers on different distros make a joined effort they could make a very good thing
Here is the description of Gnash on gnu.org (this whole gn prefix thing is getting really fucking old):
Gnash is a GNU Flash movie player. Flash is an animation file format pioneered by Macromedia which continues to be supported by their successor company, Adobe. Flash has been extended to include audio and video content, and programs written in ActionScript, an ECMAScript-compatible language. Gnash is based on GameSWF, and supports most SWF v7 features and some SWF v8 and v9.
What the fuck is the point of that???? Is it a school assignment??
Doesn't the company which invented and maintains flash, freely ship available players (yes, even for linux)? Oh yes, thats right, here they are, even for linux.
Off the top of my head, I can think of something that would distinguish gnash from adobe's solid players - incorporating tracing and debugging facilities in the player itself. But no, your only intention is to make a freetard broken knockoff of a solid, closed source program, just because its closed source. Fucking idiots.
We're supposed to believe that all these moronic, useless projects are legitimate simply because they appear on gnu.org, or because that stallman fucktard is involved.
I know I'm pushing buttons when I ask "did the FOSS community actually contribute something to computing" but this is exactly I mean: the successful FOSS projects we see today were not created by the FOSS - they became FOSS later on. They were either closed source that became open-source (e.g. firefox) or open-source which mirrors closed source that existed (e.g. linux kernel)
Also the major point of Xanadu was to add DRM and micropayments to network-based content, hardly your FOSS-type deal.
Probably the most ground-breaking thing about FOSS is the license(s). I realise you hate and despise the whole ecosystem, all the developers and the license itself, but you must concede that for something to affect that much, it must be pretty important. You don't get angry unless you care, and I've seen your hate-filled, FOSS is dead rants on here.
True. I'd like to say I'm frustrated instead of filled with hate. There's one thing I hope you'll agree: this is probably the only spot on the net which actually enables people like me to voice their frustration. If LH would have chosen any other platform for this, it would have been hacked/burned&burried a long time ago.
For instance on a Playstation 3 (which is PowerPC) with Linux, if you compile Gnash from source you can actually get it working in Firefox. That being said, Youtube videos still don't work (lame).
Adobe will probably have a reason to port flash to 64bit when eee gen2 will come out, if and when it will be 64bit, and if microsoft will provide a 64bit OS for the netbooks.
I really don't understand while adobe bothers with flash support for Linux - a good engineer costs > 100'000$ a year, a small team ~ 0.5m$ a year, and I really don't think there's any business reason to support flash for a negligible percentage of users; maybe it's done in order to keep competing FOSS formats from forming - like Ogg and Theora managed to thread mp3 and avi (yes, I know that theroa is a container, xvid is open source (but patent encumbered) etc. I don't give a shit about your syntactics)
Maybe they write it off as a loss or something
LH:
FOSS is not about pleasing the users - it's about stroking the maintainers egos, allowing them so semblance of importance beyond their luser jobs in the small corners of the corporate word they infest.
FOSS is DEAD.
Adobe is just stupid, they are in my camp.
Back in the days, 10-12 years ago, I was a linux "fan". Mostly because I just loved to tinker with the computer, but I almost immediately realized that Linux won't win the desktop then. And it still hasn't.
But still, I liked Linux.. Until I discovered the Linux community. When I first read Slashdot in 1999 (or was it 2000?) and all the other Linux "communities" on the net, like the advocacy newsgroup or heise.de, the German slashdot (I am from Germany) my love quickly went away. Never have I seen such ridiculous hateful people before.
Replace the word "microsoft" with "negro" or "jew" and many postings of the freetards would be considered as hatespeech.
The stupid hating of a single company is what drove me completely away from the "community". Yes, MS, pardon, "M$" used some qusestionable tactics.. but hey, it's the business world. And I could list dozens of companies right now, who are much worse, take Monsanto, Exxon, Nestle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestl%C3%A9#Contro...), pharmacy companies, Nike with their sweat shop labour, Coca Cola (google coca cola and south america) and many many others.
Even the beloved IBM dealth with the Nazis:
http://www.amazon.com/IBM-Holocaust-Strategic-A...
I guess the hate for MS is because the freetards are indeed that: intellectualy retarded. Yes, they can code (badly), but that's about it. They never experienced real evil in this world and real cruelty, and that's why they are projecting all their silly nerd anger at a single company. Like ungrateful little children who scream at their parents, because they ordered them to go to bed.
Reading slashdot is like reading crazed postings of cultists. What was always mind numbing, at least for me, was the uncritical affirmation that the freetards received for many years from the media. No one was critical with them. No one gave them ever a good pounding, they could write total madness, like, in one year Linux will take over, Bill Gates is the Satan incarnate, Steve Ballmer is worse than Hitler, and no one wrote one critical piece. It drove me mad. It was as if the inmates have taken over the asylum and the doctors are helping them.
And that fu... self elevation. They are acting, as if they cure AIDS and cancer with their sloppy coding. As if they are damn heroes in a epic war, UGH.
Thank you for your blog. Something like this blog was long overdue. By reading the comments I have noticed, that I am not alone, it seems many people felt this way too.
Keep up the good work hater, seriously. Those overblown egomaniacs deserve a good pounding.
Well spoken. Linux community is probably the #1 thing I really don't like about linux (even though I have it on my laptop for fun).
Indeed true words, FOSS is a utopia, it is a fake religion. Its great to see some ex-fosstards waking up a and getting back to reality.
Fight the FOSS cult! FOSS crapware does not heal the world, wake up!
...
And, ironically, Adobe and Microsoft consider that part of the "market share" a bunch of criminals, pirates.
[You forgot to add: terrorists, prostitutes, unwashed enablers of capitalist pigs]
But seriously - your point is..? They're still running what they're running, pirated or not, n'est-ce pas? Microsoft is known to tolerate piracy - where it serves them, its their right, isn't it?
As for the "criminals, murderers, rapists" stuff - it would be hard to expect that people who buy a 250-dollar PC (and 250 is BIG money in those parts of the world - not for the actual criminals, that is) assembled from parts locally in a small shop would pay 100 dollars for a copy of Windows (OEM license.. rrright, dream on). Especially considering the culture of cheap/crappy/illegal plastic copies of everything sold on every corner (made in China, usually).
After all, are there alternatives to Windows? I don't think so. I remember my problems with ALSA back in 2001/2/3, looks like after all these years the mess is still with us. And its not just the sound, its virtually every component. Linux is a constantly changing, shifting, mutating mass o'stuff. I have lost all hope it could produce something stable for the desktop, alas.
- Linux (l)user running 32bit distro on 64-but capable system. Hooray.
There is a reason *other* than "purity" to use them: performance. Not just the "x64 has twice as many registers as x86 and thus runs some code faster" performance, but the "having only one of each library loaded into RAM reduces memory requirements and allows faster app startup because cache can (more likely) serve up the necessary libraries" performance.
Consider Adobe Flash Player: it imports 42 libraries (according to ldd), most (all?) of which will already be loaded on a 64-bit system...but in a 64-bit library, and thus unusable. A second (32-bit) copy of the library will need to be loaded in order to allow libflashplayer.so to be loaded. (For example, all of /lib/libc-2.8.so, /lib64/libc-2.8.so, /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0, and /usr/lib64/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 will be loaded on a mixed 32/64 system...)
Now, perhaps reducing memory requirements and improving startup speed isn't important, in which case mixed 32/64 systems work just fine. For others, memory and startup are important, for which reason (among others) OpenOffice.org was ported to be a 64-bit executable.
In benchmarks some x32 programs have in fact ran better than their x64 counterparts:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2280...
But anyways the main benefit from 64 bit is being able to access more than 3 gigs of memory, and if you actually have a need for that amount of ram for something like multimedia work you are probably not using Linux in the first place.
The additional memory usage of having 32- and 64-bit dyanmic libraries loaded is well worth the side effect of HAVING A WORKING FLASH PLAYER.
I run 64 bit Ubuntu and a 64 bit Firefox and Flash works for me! *ducks*
Seriously, LH again has a point. *I* don't care about "64 bit purity". I'm intimately aware of the limitations of 8 bit, 16 bit, 32 bit, and 64 bit programming. I've programmed under all of them. I also know that when it comes to using a web browser and Flash, I don't give a s*** about the purity of my system. Hence why I found a way to make Flash work on my system.
But I shouldn't have had to "figure it out". It should ave worked out of the box.
Ta-dah. What some FOSS advocates need to understand is that these companies are interested in making a profit, and they don't care for RMS' idea of freedom at all, no matter how much the FOSS community flies that flag. As it stands, Linux isn't popular enough to make a great profit. There's even less profit if you decide to keep the source and just release binaries - some Linux users won't install anything if they can't see the code.
Personally, I don't care about RMS and his crusade. I use what works. Windows Vista works. ArchLinux works. Hence, I use those. I don't look at the source code, and quite frankly, I probably wouldn't understand it anyway. And that's why the response "You have the source, fix it yourself." doesn't work.
I don't know why, but the Linux distros always ship with 64-bit browsers, and I've yet too see the point, just like LH, like come on, it removes the biggest issue of x64 Linux next to x64 Java on Linux if they'd ship with a 32-bit browser.
My system doesn't crash... Ever.
It goes into S3 sleep automagically and wakes up faster than my flatscreen monitor can wake up from sleep. (I can log in blind and my desktop is waiting by the time my monitor comes back to life. I can hot undock from the docking station--which for some reason Apple doesn't provide for their hardware.
Once you get over the cognitive dissonance of running a UNIX environment supported by MSFT on Windows you realize that it doesn't suck. Life is pretty good.
Yeah, but it's so much easier for lusers to throw their hands up and blame .NET.
Does that sound the same as your argument? I think so.
Whats this got to do with .NET again?
As long as we're hating on Linux, how about an article on PHP?
Smell the hypocrisy!
.NET is dead.
Here's a link that looks similar to my problem, mine doesn't include crashes though:
http://www.bokebb.com/dev/english/1994/posts/19... . He's talking about a known resource leak problem in windows server 2k3, my guess exactly.
You and the other guy above still say nothing about the way such an error is handled by .NET.
Hey, load up a 50,000 line table in Firefox and tell me how well it scrolls. Clearly HTML and Mozilla must be totally flawed.
By the way, I'm not a programmer, in this case your evaluation of the problem as an expert seems to be lacking.
its not a question of whether the x86 code can execute on the processor, it's more about if there are x86 libraries available (or is the OS capable of loading mixed assemblies, or emulating etc)
OTOH, the original 16-bit WOW subsystem is gone.
Also, you are required to have native 64-bit drivers that are required to be signed. The need for signed 64-bit drivers was the biggest hiccup for me when Vista was first released.
Of course, most driver developers shouldn't be using kernel mode at all; in fact the only thing I can think of that really needs the added performance is video card drivers. If only shit OSS driver developers would stop developing kernel mode USB drivers for no good reason..
Sorry no deviece makers don't have to open up there specs at all STOP Spreading crap on this. Linux kernel developers just want them out of ring 0. Reason why there is a User mode stable driver ABI.
If there was no stable ABI for closed source developers then your stuff would be true. You can build agp pci and pci-e drivers all in userspace.
The pure application 64 bit stuff does not exist at kernel level. Truly the Linux kernel does not give a stuff about it. There are some lesser quality distrobutions out there that don't give people nice ways of installing 32 bit applications.
Migration to 64 bit would be so much nicer if distros provided the support they should.
WOW64 fails on windows. Guess why. Applications have been allowed over and over again to put there own closed source drivers in kernel space so 32 bit drivers don't work on the windows 64 bit kernel so the applications die.
Linux guys have lots of valid reasons for saying here is userspace closed source drivers get your back side there. So in future we don't have problems.
They r finally trying to elevate Ubuntu user interface. I think u should talk about Linux's inconsistent GUI standards too.
Will they be able to compete with Apple and Microsoft designers!
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=9419
Anyway, Im curious what the Linux Hater have to say about the open source JDK clones ...
Nazis
So, yes, AMD worked with both Microsoft and the Linux community to spread adoption of x86_64.
You deserve to get paid for this website! Whether you are "Right" or "Wrong" doesn't matter.
Your popularity is growing. I'm seeing links to you everywhere. There are other AD networks besides Google. Check them out before the fervour dies down.
For those who believe 64-bit can greatly improve the performance, please try it yourself before arguing here. Most of the desktop apps for Linux today are I/O bound. Their slowness has nothing to do with 32-bit or 64-bit. The bottle neck is in other places. Theoretically, 64-bit should be faster. However, the complexity and additional I/O induced by it can offset the performance gain in many cases. So, currently, completely shifting to 64-bit gives no "visible" performance gain. Notice that here I say "no visible", not "no".
Try it yourself before arguing here. Be sure that the OS is installed by others so you don't know if its 64-bit before testing to prevent placebo effect. Sometimes, you'll find that 32-bit Linux desktop is actually faster.
Believe it or not, but please try it yourself.
Because there is NO VISIBLE DIFFERENCE.
Actually, 64-bit systems won't give you a faster desktop now, nor will it double the performance. Try it yourself.
And no-one needs more than 32 bits. In fact, no-one needs more than 640k.
Another company in a similar situation to Adobe w.r.t. Flash is Real. They open-sourced their core media player (as Helix) a few years ago, but it's only very recently that the 64-bit port becomes usable. Perhaps there's something in the open-source model after all -- the main developers might not care about 64-bit support, or support for ARM, PPC, etc. (insert your favourite platform here), but anyone who care enough to do it, and do it properly, will likely see the change merged in, or fork the project.
Maybe you should think twice before writing your articles.
No, he said the Browser. Nice try though. it makes people on the fence like me realise that you lusers are slowly losing sanity.
There is NO NEED for a browser to need more than a few GB. Unless you have 200 porn movies loaded ( wouldn't surprise me), or loading a website whose webmaster needs a bullet in the head(Momma said not to drink too much AJAX), I think a 32 bit browser is more than enough.
Of course, me being the stupid tech-impaired person, has really no interest in 64 bittiness in the first place. Reminds me of a Nintendo I had in middle school. Then I realise that it's MEMORY that is the main issue here, and let's be honest, 16 exabytes? What the fuck are you running, Mission control? Yeah, it's fun to poke fun at ol Billy and say that 640K as a limit was a bit nearsighted, but maybe he had something a bit different in mind. Limitations seem to have this great ability to make programmers do it RIGHT. Maybe it's the fear of running out of memory.
Even 4 GB I thought was too much. But not in the FOSS world. Some developers there must think a garbage collector is what drives up to pick up their weekly trash of doubleshot cans and pizza boxes.
it wont load even google's page!!!
i'm running with 4Zettabytes and dont think i could end this po
career
baby
love
wedding
movie
anecdote
children
management
automobile
marriage
health
cat
dog
wedding
Philosophy
food
travel
DIY
lose weight
gardening
flower
health
love
wedding
what's your excuse then?
You'll see that it not only eats up a LOT of processor, but it slows the entire system down.
Now only that, but having mixed software like that makes Windows extremely unstable.
But you wouldn't know anything about being stable, would you?
On the other hand, we're all allowed our opinions. You've voiced yours.
Why do you need to give so much of a fuck about Linux?
Except if you use it ;)
OS makers have the right to choose what sections of code they keep stable. Linux case userspace interface is kept stable. Driver API is provided from userspace that is also stable. Closed source drivers that don't use it. Its there problem. Embed world talked with the Linux kernel developers and found out exactly what the issues were. So we took that onboard and added usermode drivers. No kernel developer has a Issue with closed source usermode drivers even when using stuff like kernel mode linux to load them temp into kernel space. Reason wrong processor type driver can still be run back in usermode space using qemu. Yes you can use a Linux x86 usermode driver on a arm processor or any of the list of processes qemu supports. Also here is the other thing Linux User Mode drivers can be coded in Java and .net if you wish to take the speed hit. So yes you have been given every form of language support for driver development. Why are you complaining about it. And why are you not using and improving it Nvidia?
There are many key reason why what is being asked for is. Its called the always work no matter what the processor is. The source stuff you can rebuild. The non source stuff you can emulate if needed.
Are you going to try to make Microsoft make there syscalls standard so we can have our own custom interfaces on top. I think they are not going to bend either.
Wow64 is a example of why Linux guys don't want a kernel level driver ABI stable. If appplication start embeded themselfs that deep closed you have big problems when you need to change cpu handling down there. Lot of win32 applications fail to run on Windows 64 because there drivers will not run. Closed source drivers kernel space CPU lock in.
Stop using bad logic. There are many valid reasons why Linux does not have a stable kernel mode ABI. That is the kernel developers right. They could have gone for a full microkernel design where no driver ever run in kernel space.
Even if you write an open-source, user-space driver it can stil be broken if Linus and the rest of the peanuts gang decide that they feel like changing something.
My god vmware keeps getting broken from kernel updates. Linux is a toy for Linus and his friends to use, they could care less about what might be broken from their adjustments.
vmware is another one that directly loads its driver into kernel space. And never puts its driver forward for kernel including. PS linux and windows has been hacked from inside a vmware machine because of defects in that driver.
So there are good reasons why these closed source drivers are wanted out.
They have made it 100 percent clear that the kernel is api will be unstable. How long do companies have to stupidly bash there heads on a wall before they get it.
Stable user apis have been provided they have not broken one anywhere since there include.
Some would argue that they like it that way, it acts as an incentive to use open code which can be recompiled every time they decide to add a new flag to 50 API calls. Like someone from pulseaudio saying it's fine it deliberately broke Flash, it means that Adobe are suddenly going to call a high-level meeting and afterwards the company will rip up its business plan and announce that it has bowed to his will.
Of course, as a user, I don't want to recompile everything on the whim of a band of keyboard bangers with attention deficit disorder or wait for the changes to trickle down to repositories. I want it to work.
So there you have it. Linux, pissing off both companies and users. Someone remind me who this OS is for again?
There is a good reason not to use userspace drivers: performance.
You cant compare windows syscall to unix syscalls, in linux standard syscall is needed for unix compatiblity and say this is a cheap copy of unix, in windows you do not need to use syscalls.
You are just full of shit.
The sad thing is ... he doesn't even know it.
Windows syscalls are a mess. Almost Every time you do a ntdll call you call a syscall in windows stallmanix. You use them quite a lot only one catch you cannot by pass ntdll and go directly to them unless you know how they change. Nice that a project provides a interface lib so you don't need to use ntdll http://code.google.com/p/native-nt-toolkit/ . Funny enough it does cause some secuirty problems in some versions of windows because windows designed some of there secuirty in ntdll.dll with the stupid idea you could not bypass it. Seams like the same stupid idea you have.
Linux turns out to be choose for the standard for the Unix syscall numbers why because it was the only one threw its history that had stable syscall numbers. Yet nothing says all the applications on the system has to use those standard syscall numbers.
Performance not really. You are missing that linux kernel from embeded now has a real time processing group that cuts the difference down a lot. It is possible to run a usermode driver in kernel space. So that performance difference can be cured. http://web.yl.is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~tosh/kml/ The way its done is secure.
There is no valid reason other than not being prepared to put resources up to complete the work.
So if you understood the tech you were talking about you would know that you were saying lots of it.
And please tell me how ndk bypass ntdll? All i see is a bounch of functions and types definition and nothing more.
It's Adobe's fault if its flash plugin plugin for linux sucks. Why blaming Linux?
It's true that flash use in the www is massive, but your dollar-centric argument is quite questionable.
An open source alternative for flash was impossible until Adobe opened flash format specifications. Adobe lawyers would have fallen on any free attempt of creating a free flash player before that. And that's because of the dollars, the patents.
They create the "standard" but they support it only when they think they'll get revenue. Great.
Of course in a selfish world where dollars justify everything that makes sense.
But let me remind you that most of the people of the world isn't in the position of spending their dollars on proprietary technologies for entertainment. They have to use those dollars to eat and live, and free alternatives are appreciated.
But of course, this is something difficult to understand for the average consumer from a wealthy country.
I want to clarify this because I can see the reply coming: "If you haven't enough money to feed yourself, then don't buy a computer".
In developing countries (poverty doesn't live in Africa only) a computer can be an exceptional source of education and knowledge.
Unfortunately that access to contents is obstaculized by lousy proprietary technologies such as Flash, because a big corporation pushed to convert it in a standard and stupid developers started to create contents using that shit.
And if you step out of the US or Europe, you'll notice that most of the windows OSes installed (which make the gross figures that Microsoft uses for describing their OS adoption worldwide) are pirated copies.
Because computers sold in the third world are mostly unbranded computers sold without OS or with illegal copies of Windows.
That's in large extent the situation that helped flash to be a "standard".
And, ironically, Adobe and Microsoft consider that part of the "market share" a bunch of criminals, pirates.
It's funny, but when it comes to say how many users has Windows or internet explorer to define a "market share" the pirates are also considered. But they're still illegal and can't be supported because they didn't pay.
"most users don't even know what 64 bit means".
Of course. And there are 32 bit versions with better support for popular technologies for them. Someone who really needs 64 bits will maybe be more concern about having high memory usage application working instead of youtube videos.
That's my case, and even I can watch my youtube videos perfectly.
P.s.: As a Linux user, I really find most of your criticisms to be valid. And I think that oppinions like these should be considered to improve the operating system.
But in this particular case I can't agree. This is clearly something that falls on Adobe's court, and the free alternatives should be discussed just when they're mature enough to compete with the proprietary solution. And that's not now.
Nope.
They can get it to work in Konqueror. They can look in each other's source to see how they did it.
No excuses.
FOSS is DEAD
Maybe Konqueror guys didn't make it yet, and it seems to be the same case than Opera's. And Opera is closed source software.
Are you saying that if two browsers can't run a closed source plugin that was designed for another platform is their fault or the host OS' fault, but not the plugin creator's fault?
Their efforts are useless. They are morons and their software sucks just because they do not support nicely an awfully designed plugin?
Riiiiight!
There are no excuses for bad user experience - if a critical piece is buggy, it MUST be worked around in order to provide the costumer the best possible experience.
Failing to do so is failing to deliver, no excuses are possible (try telling your boss that you couldn't deliver a product because library X has bugs and you couldn't be bothered to work around them.. you'll get booted right away).
FOSS is DEAD
(try telling your boss that you couldn't deliver a product because library X has bugs and you couldn't be bothered to work around them.. you'll get booted right away).
Nice attempt at rhetoric, shame it's got nothing to do with the discussion at hand.
FOSS is DEAD
No, you just want it to be dead. IMO, if it gets on your nerves, FOSS must be great, because you are an annoying shit.
I'm not saying you should, but you can't compare things that aren't under the same scope.
If your concern is about business, and your business need flash as a critical piece of technology, sure you should be using a proprietary platform, so go on, buy it and move along.
I mean, If my business would need autocad, I wouldn't choose a platform that is not suitable to run it (linux, for instance). But there are other uses for a computer, that don't need proprietary technologies.
Saying that FOSS is dead simply because it doesn't fit your particular corporate needs is ridiculous. You're forgetting a lot of uses that FOSS made important contributions to.
But, I insist. If you try to judge this subject with the money-making argument, maybe you're wasting your time.
It's not about money, is about access to the code, collaborative development, and freedom. And by freedom I don't mean an utopian dream of liberty. I mean a concrete freedom to choose what I want to do with my machine without being tied to corporations' whims.
User are not only end-users (which FOSS developers see as nuisance at worst and free QA at best), but also other developers, member of the collective cyber-jerk. If a Linux kernel hacker cannot see his favorite gay midget pornography on redtube, than the browser developer didn't cater to the needs of its follower, and thus failed.
Your own failure to comprehend what working environment means overwhelmed me. Go fuck yourself, moron.
FOSS is DEAD
So everything reduces to "go fuck your self, moron"? now we're talking!
What can I say...
Is useless to talk with someone like you. Bye.
You're so special that you couldn't have been bothered to read any other responses in this thread or other posts. Run away!
I'll bite, because I guess you're having a slow day as well.
This whole blog, its participants, and the contents of the article are not polite, reasonable, or nice.
Being nice didn't work for the last 20 years, so LH is trying to shove some sense into your heads using harsh words. Since the type of arguments Gez was giving was discussed to death - the whole FOSS blame game, works for me, yada yada- I see no reason to try being polite when confronted with obvious cluelessness.
If I'll continue your line of argument, this entire blog is to be ignored since it does not present arguments in a "reasonable" way, and on forums like Slashdot will account as trolling.
Another point, you fucking asshole - if using colourful language to pass a point (the same gay midget porn your masturbating to right now, you freedard penguinfucker), is enough for you to ignore the actual contents of the argument, than again you're focusing on syntactics rather than contents;
if your best effort to confront an argument is by focusing on the delivery rather than the contents, than you have failed to follow an argument, failed to pass your point, and failed, generally, because you're a clueless fuck who cannot take a stand in an argument without diverting its focus.
Now please tell me that Linux is a kernel, so you've got an automatic win, and that your mum thinks that you're oh so very special, and that's way you're locked in your basement for the last ten years, for the world is not ready to be confronted with your glory, ye mutt.
FOSS is DEAD
For the record, I think LH's posts are spot on, it's clueless cuntmunchers, like you, in the comments.
So Linux might be shit, but you're worse for caring so much. Come on prick-tits, you have to post FOSS is DEAD at the end of every post, you're not convincing anyone but yourself.
LH has some very good points, but he's far removed from the marmot's scrotal sacks that roam his blog. Yes, by replying to your stupidity, I am lowering myself to your level, thanks for lowering the tone you bison's bollock.
If you don't see them as customers, then you can't be aware of what they want, instead yo will do the same thing freetards do all the time: do what they want without HEARING their USERS, that happens to be their CUSTOMERS (even if ther are not paying damn cash)!
That's the true problem here, the inhability of free software developers for giving what their (desktop) users want.
No, what I'm saying is:
If one browser can and the other can't then it's not the fault of the plugin. Never had flash working without crashing in FF, in Konqueror it runs. The "buggy plugin" root-cause doesn't hold up.
Anyway it seems to be something that have being worked and is less frequent. A couple of months ago it was indeed a generalized rant, but now it works pretty well.
It doesn't matter how each browser uses the plugin, the bugs in the Linux version of Flash are the same, so the experience with Flash across all browsers is the same. Please get a clue about how plugins work before speaking so definitively about this.
Secondly, FOSS is not dead. OTOH, it's really just coming out on its own. This blog and its readers equate Linux with FOSS, but Linux is just ONE of the projects in an entire software developing philosophy and industry. There are lots of established FOSS projects which have proven the test of time and will continue to. To say FOSS is dead when Firefox is just eating away more marketshare by the day is just ignorant.
On other OSes - yes. All the really good free apps work on Windows and OS X too.
But you see, Linux is the poster boy of FOSS. And it sucks. I love Firefox, I love Blender, OO.org is ok for me (I don't use office apps at home much and use MS Office at work, as a viewer mostly :). Linux - I just hate it. As a poor man's OS it can be somewhat useful (even poor people don't like to be fed with shit, that's why "somewhat")
Is it a modern full-fledged desktop operating system? I say - NO, it fails as such. Linux may work if you just install your distro (and lucky enough to have all your hardware supported), but its better left untouched after that. Don't update it. Most importantly - don't install any 3rd-party apps. It would probably work, but I (for instance) want more from an OS.
Your gripes about Linux are entirely correct. I've used it extensively, and it just isn't ready for the mainstream, and if it isn't ready now, it won't be ready any time soon. I still think that FOSS is a great development model - it is just not suited to all apps like FOSS devs say (neither are proprietary apps, for that matter), in this case, the desktop. The problem with FOSS is one of leadership, not of competence. There are some excellent coders supporting the FOSS movement. The Gnome and KDE teams too - but they simply don't have a direction or a goal, and there is so much division in ideas and methods - that it all really serves nothing in the end. I'm not putting any faith in the Linux Desktop to succeed, if it will, it won't be with KDE or Gnome - but an entirely new desktop that addresses the myriad of flaws with either one and has the unanimous support of Linux developers. That isn't going to happen soon, but there's no reason to think that FOSS apps can't be good.
I know... you need audience share! And this is a supposed "just for fun" blog. But it could be much more, because you know about the matters in question. If it was a serious blog, no one would read it... But it stopped being funny and started being quite stupid.
If FOSS is dead, why do so many companies back-it up? Why do the "paytards" come here to bash it? Do you people love kicking dead horses? Probably that's funny but i just don't get it...
I hate FOSS zealots (Stallman et all), but i also hate paytards (usually Apple or MS zealots - both annoy me). There's a huge grey area between the two - that's where I live AND work.
And then, there are the lots and lots of misconceptions of these lame commenters (let's just call them paytards!), who believe that most of the people that contribute to Open Source are teenagers that live in their parent's basement (some jackass said it was 99%), etc.
This blog annoys me. Not because of the relevance of most of its posts, but because of the attitude involved.
See you around. Thank you for the relevant points. Not so thank you for the attitude, which is quite annoying!
Because they have access to a community of people who will do all their development for free, which they can then take and make money off of.
As Linux Hater pointed out, how does it feel to do all that free work then watch Apple and Google make money off it?
The purpose of Linux or FOSS was never to make money. Do you really think the people who code for Linux are in it to make it big or become the next Google or Microsoft? There's really no comparison. If Google and Apple make money off of free software, that's well and good, but in the case of Google, the FOSS community benefits as well - so it's a win-win relationship for both. Google gets to make money, while Google contributes to open-source projects (like Wine). If you think FOSS is being screwed out of something and they're not realizing it, you're very sadly mistaken. If the Linux coders wanted money, they'd ask compensation for their code and work, which clearly isn't the goal or desire of FOSS developers.
Whether or not they're in it for the money, they're being exploited. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't like to be pimped out.
In the case of the BSD license, I would agree, however. Apple has found a source of development where they don't even have to code for their OS, simple recognize the technically competent software projects (like KHTML and ZFS) and integrate into their own OS. The success story of OSX is really something, and shows a reliable stream of profit generation.
But the BSD license also represents the kind of freedom that even Linux and its associated GPL software doesn't have. The BSD projects are even more willing for their code to be used as anyone finds use for it. The GPL does not allow such and finds a way to balance the relationship between the open-source and companies so that both can benefit. It's still debatable which license is better, but the BSD is certainly an exploitable license.
In order to get to the root of a problem, you first have to admit the existence of the problem. You don't have to solve it. You have to identify it. That's what LH is doing.
If FOSS is dead, why do so many companies back-it up?
Because some people are too stupid to realize that they're being exploited. Or, maybe, they like taking it up the ass.
Why do the "paytards" come here to bash it?
Because many of us used to be lusers and got tired of being over-hyped and under-delivered by the Linux Priesthood. They always promise that things will be better TOMORROW, but tomorrow never comes. It's just this constantly sliding timeline, pushing further and further out.
I hate FOSS zealots (Stallman et all), but i also hate paytards (usually Apple or MS zealots - both annoy me). There's a huge grey area between the two - that's where I live AND work.
Right, and that "grey area" is a wasteland, where nothing works, you waste tons of time trying to figure out WTF is wrong, yadda, yadda.
And then, there are the lots and lots of misconceptions of these lame commenters (let's just call them paytards!), who believe that most of the people that contribute to Open Source are teenagers that live in their parent's basement (some jackass said it was 99%), etc.
There are basically 3 kinds of people working on FOSS...
1. Paid developers (Novell, Red Hat, IBM, etc) -- the only real professionals working on FOSS.
2. Dev wanna-be's -- They work in IT shops, nobody is going to pay them to code with the big boys, so they write freetard code.
3. Hobbyists/teenagers -- They're not contributing anything worth mentioning. They use and play around with FOSS apps, they have little coding ability, and they think they know more than they actually do. These are the tools who generally get into the OS flame wars.
Shitty engineering discipline has gutted Linux of its potential.
It is true that open source hardware drivers added to the main Kernel tree are nice in theory. The problem is that as the number of drivers grows, so does the work needed to maintain them: after a while, it will become much less time consuming to developp stable APIs (and stable ABIs) inside the Kernel and leave drivers' maintenance to hardware manufacturers. FOSS guys keep saying that stable APIs and ABIs are evil, but experience has shown for nearly 20 years that it is a solution that just work.
You're doing it yourself. The attitude on this blog has surprised me actually: it's improving in comparison with previous entries.
Good idea tho!
This yields an error because of the space in "gutsy gibbon". You should use "-s to escape the string. Pretty much proves that you don't know shit about bash (and about linux for that matter). So good bashing you fucking retard.
BadKarma
Wrong, it's:
You should use "-s" to escape the string.
Derek Smart! Derek Smart! DEREK SMART!!!
Derek Smart's Desktop Commander
Reasons why Linux is providing a Usermode Driver ABI.
1) A driver created in Usermode to be correct any linux usermode program can be run on the incorrect cpu if needed using qemu http://bellard.org/qemu/qemu-doc.html#SEC67. So x86 32 bit driver will kinda work over most of the Linux world.
2)Any form of interperted/bytecode or machine code could be uses as a driver. So a companies could release .net and java drivers for linux now. Or java or .net drivers could be wrapped and connected to the Linux kernel.
3)Kernel secuirty is maintained.
4)There exists a way that needed more development to have usermode drivers run in kernel space removing the user space overhead. If closed source developers complete it. There is no performance price to pay. Kernel Mode Linux running a Linux User Space Driver would give what Nvidia has now.
So no valid reason to have a kernel stable ABI at all really. Better to shove the ones that are in there out for the long term good.
What you say? How are you gentlemen!
LH loves missing that closed source drivers other than them exist. Ones that are closed source user space even some of them are open source as well. There are a set of firewall extensions that exist as a pack of userspace drivers as well completely open source..
Basically the no kernel driver ABI and ripping into NVIDIA to attempt to get them out of kernel space for good are all part of the process.
Not all things in Linux are short terms plans. Lot of secuirty stuff was planed years ago. Base,Base
If I write a closed source driver for Linux, how long can I expect kernel compatibility?
Answer: Any kernel update may break the driver.
Do you realize how unappealing this makes Linux to ISVs and IHVs? What if Ford said you are free to change the stereo deck but it might not work after you get your car serviced?
Answer: Any kernel update may break the driver."
And this is why hardly any companies want to write drivers for linux, because it is always broken next time 'round.
Userspace driver api does not break with kernel updates. They don't mess with its structs. This is done because embedded guys don't take there drivers breaking either. Realtime group is where the embedded driver run surprising small overhead less than 0.1 of a percent difference between a kernel mode driver and a user space driver. With kernel mode linux basically nil. So no advantage here.
Note all stable kernel abi's also cost over all OS speed due to things not being changeable.
"My laptop is fine, but it's BIOS isn't free, so I had to liberate it. Oh, wait, I can't do that, it stays enslaved no matter what. I have to find a laptop with free BIOS. BIOS libre, so to say. OLPC looks good, but wait! It's Wi-Fi isn't free, It is an agent of evil and it must be destroyed, otherwise Microsoft will take control of my laptop, preventing me from reading all the books I want to read. This is what they try to do all the time, so losing Wi-Fi is no big deal if it keeps evils of Microsoft away. Deleted the non-free file.. Phew, that was close, they almost got me this time!"
"Proprietary software keeps users divided and helpless."
I thought that was xconf.org.
Here's a hint: nVidia keep making their drivers because their users want them. Their drivers are the best there are in Linux, for any video card.
I hope you finally get what you want and break nVidia drivers, ndiswrapper, etc... Then perhaps people will wake up and use an OS that works instead of an OS that changes on the whim of a bunch of megalomaniacs.