What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu" - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu" - Ubuntu ; On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 09:01:54 +0100, Christopher Hunter wrote: > Jose wrote: > >> On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 15:01:51 +0000, SINNER wrote: >> >>> You arent born with that knowledge in Windows either. >> >> Yes, but Windows ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 71

Thread: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

  1. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 09:01:54 +0100, Christopher Hunter wrote:

    > Jose wrote:
    >
    >> On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 15:01:51 +0000, SINNER wrote:
    >>
    >>> You arent born with that knowledge in Windows either.

    >>
    >> Yes, but Windows users aren't expected to edit config files manually.
    >> It can be done if necessary, but usually isn't, because driver support
    >> is good.
    >>
    >>

    > Windows driver support is universally abysmal! Particularly if you're
    > trying to use the "latest and greatest" Vista.
    >
    > Quick "usability" testing of Vista with a dozen standard PCs showed that
    > *all* of them had hardware driver "issues", some of which made Vista
    > completely un-runnable!
    >
    > Installation of Ubuntu 8.04.1 on all the same hardware met 100% success
    > - without having to seek out driver disks or obscure driver files from
    > the internet.
    >
    > There is no comparison anymore!
    >
    > C.


    Really ?

    Not what I've seen on my PC.
    And it's a Dell ... pretty standard.

    None of your dozens of PC's had an X-Fi sound card ?



    --
    Hobbes, Tiger Extraordinaire

  2. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    On 2008-08-17, Jose hit the keyboard and wrote:
    > On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 12:52:49 +1000, Bob wrote:
    >
    >> Jose, isn't your own wishful thinking only compounding bloat that
    >> "shouldn't" be here?

    >
    > Yes, as much as a man page does. The list could be online, with a link
    > easily available from within Ubuntu.


    IFCONFIG(8) Linux Programmer’s Manual IFCONFIG(8)



    NAME
    ifconfig - configure a network interface

    SYNOPSIS
    ifconfig [-v] [-a] [-s] [interface]
    ifconfig [-v] interface [aftype] options | address ...

    DESCRIPTION
    Ifconfig is used to configure the kernel-resident network interfaces.
    It is used at boot time to set up interfaces as necessary. After that,
    it is usually only needed when debugging or when system tuning is
    needed.

    +++++++++++++++

    Now just envision a noob like yourself who somehow found out that
    ifconfig is tool to configure the NIC, but if this information isn't
    readily available on his PC, he is out of luck.



    > Not right away. I do intend to participate, but let's first see if I
    > have anything valuable to add. So far this suggestion has met with such
    > hostility that I question why Linux users even tolerate man pages. After
    > all, the code is available and can be studied.



    Hostility? Now you exaggerate. You came here made some
    claims, and then when myself and others pointed out that
    *sometimes* in windows the user has to perform "open-heart
    surgery" on the system i.e. edit the registry-file, you
    ignored the point made: That under Gnu/Linux it can be a
    lot easier to solve certain issues with a particular
    application if one knows how to edit a file pertaining to
    the application.

    >
    > At some point, if I decide that Linux is a good idea, and that I have
    > something worthwhile to add to the mix, I'll join in. At this point I'm
    > still at the "how do I do this" stage.


    You lucky dude, you can get to know Gnu/Linux at a stage,
    one f.e. simply fires up synaptic and chooses the package.

    When I started out one had to download a certain package one
    wanted to install.

    untar it (and if needed read through "README/INSTALL" and then
    if necessary edit a conf-file, next

    run the commands
    "./configure"
    "make"
    "make install"

    and if "./configure" barks about a missing file, hunt that
    down, install it and cross the fingers that this time it
    will finish smoothly. Some people installed the Desktop
    Gnome that way, download a whole bunch of tar-files and
    following a certain order, run all three commands. This is
    long part of the past, and let me tell you I don't miss
    these days.


    >
    > Perhaps once I figure out "how to do this" I won't care if anybody else
    > needs to know, and I'll also drip contempt on those who are so brazen as
    > to have an idea to make things easier. But not yet.


    Your idea to make things easier, came across as make it like it's
    done on M$, your *database* case in point.

    >
    > I can't do everything at once, and meanwhile, I have work to do that the
    > computer is supposed to make easier for me to do in the first place.
    >
    > In any case, I won't be contributing to this thread any more. I have
    > stated my case, those who are in a good position to make it happen and
    > think it's a good idea already have it in their heads, and those that
    > don't fall into that category don't need to hear any more about it from
    > me.


    Sorry Dude I still don't see any need to create a bloated
    database on some server, just because a few people in the
    world, get used equipment and don't know the specifications
    of the hardware they are using. I'm sure Windows could have
    told you all the info's in "System" (OK I used only Win98).

    I wish you luck and have a great adventure exploring
    Gnu/Linux. No hard feelings on this side, (don't want to
    leave on a sour note)

    >



    > Jose




    Dragomir Kollaric
    --
    This signature is licensed under the GPL and may be
    freely distributed as long as a copy of the GPL is included... :-)

  3. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 13:15:15 +0200, Hobbes wrote:

    > None of your dozens of PC's had an X-Fi sound card ?


    You can thank Creative for the lack of X-Fi support in Linux. This
    appeared on ALSA's vendor matrix soon after X-Fi was released:

    | Sound Blaster X-Fi UNKNOWN [X-]
    | Card delivered to developers. Completely new architecture. Creative
    | actively preventing support due to no datasheets being released to ALSA
    | developers. Reverse engineering work not started due to lack of time.

    Creative futzed about for two years trying to develop their own
    proprietary driver but finally relented and coughed up the data in
    February:
    http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...releases-specs

    An ALSA driver for X-Fi is on the way.




    --
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  4. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    "Snowbat" wrote in message
    news:5d716$48a8a475$3718@news.teranews.com...
    > On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 13:15:15 +0200, Hobbes wrote:
    >
    >> None of your dozens of PC's had an X-Fi sound card ?

    >
    > You can thank Creative for the lack of X-Fi support in Linux. This
    > appeared on ALSA's vendor matrix soon after X-Fi was released:
    >
    > | Sound Blaster X-Fi UNKNOWN [X-]
    > | Card delivered to developers. Completely new architecture. Creative
    > | actively preventing support due to no datasheets being released to ALSA
    > | developers. Reverse engineering work not started due to lack of time.
    >
    > Creative futzed about for two years trying to develop their own
    > proprietary driver but finally relented and coughed up the data in
    > February:
    > http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...releases-specs
    >
    > An ALSA driver for X-Fi is on the way.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **



    And that driver won't install.
    Not on 8.04 anyway.

    Just google X-Fi error 2

    --
    Hobbes, Tiger Extraordinaire


  5. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    "Snowbat" wrote in message
    news:5d716$48a8a475$3718@news.teranews.com...
    > On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 13:15:15 +0200, Hobbes wrote:
    >
    >> None of your dozens of PC's had an X-Fi sound card ?

    >
    > You can thank Creative for the lack of X-Fi support in Linux. This
    > appeared on ALSA's vendor matrix soon after X-Fi was released:
    >
    > | Sound Blaster X-Fi UNKNOWN [X-]
    > | Card delivered to developers. Completely new architecture. Creative
    > | actively preventing support due to no datasheets being released to ALSA
    > | developers. Reverse engineering work not started due to lack of time.
    >
    > Creative futzed about for two years trying to develop their own
    > proprietary driver but finally relented and coughed up the data in
    > February:
    > http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...releases-specs
    >
    > An ALSA driver for X-Fi is on the way.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **



    Hey ... I don't give Creative any applause what-so-ever.
    After almost 2 years , they finally released fully functional Vista drivers.

    But if Linux wants to be a player...they will need boxes on a shelf.
    Plain and simple for true Joe Twelve Pack acceptance.

    --
    Hobbes, Tiger Extraordinaire


  6. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    Hobbes wrote:
    > "Snowbat" wrote in message
    > news:5d716$48a8a475$3718@news.teranews.com...
    >> On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 13:15:15 +0200, Hobbes wrote:
    >>
    >>> None of your dozens of PC's had an X-Fi sound card ?

    >>
    >> You can thank Creative for the lack of X-Fi support in Linux. This
    >> appeared on ALSA's vendor matrix soon after X-Fi was released:
    >>
    >> | Sound Blaster X-Fi UNKNOWN [X-]
    >> | Card delivered to developers. Completely new architecture. Creative
    >> | actively preventing support due to no datasheets being released to ALSA
    >> | developers. Reverse engineering work not started due to lack of time.
    >>
    >> Creative futzed about for two years trying to develop their own
    >> proprietary driver but finally relented and coughed up the data in
    >> February:
    >> http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...releases-specs
    >>
    >>
    >> An ALSA driver for X-Fi is on the way.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> --
    >> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

    >
    >
    > Hey ... I don't give Creative any applause what-so-ever.
    > After almost 2 years , they finally released fully functional Vista
    > drivers.
    >
    > But if Linux wants to be a player...they will need boxes on a shelf.
    > Plain and simple for true Joe Twelve Pack acceptance.
    >



    No the manufacturers do.
    caver1

  7. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    "caver1" wrote in message
    news:g8af12$87l$1@registered.motzarella.org...
    > Hobbes wrote:
    >> "Snowbat" wrote in message
    >> news:5d716$48a8a475$3718@news.teranews.com...
    >>> On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 13:15:15 +0200, Hobbes wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> None of your dozens of PC's had an X-Fi sound card ?
    >>>
    >>> You can thank Creative for the lack of X-Fi support in Linux. This
    >>> appeared on ALSA's vendor matrix soon after X-Fi was released:
    >>>
    >>> | Sound Blaster X-Fi UNKNOWN [X-]
    >>> | Card delivered to developers. Completely new architecture. Creative
    >>> | actively preventing support due to no datasheets being released to
    >>> ALSA
    >>> | developers. Reverse engineering work not started due to lack of time.
    >>>
    >>> Creative futzed about for two years trying to develop their own
    >>> proprietary driver but finally relented and coughed up the data in
    >>> February:
    >>> http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...releases-specs
    >>>
    >>> An ALSA driver for X-Fi is on the way.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

    >>
    >>
    >> Hey ... I don't give Creative any applause what-so-ever.
    >> After almost 2 years , they finally released fully functional Vista
    >> drivers.
    >>
    >> But if Linux wants to be a player...they will need boxes on a shelf.
    >> Plain and simple for true Joe Twelve Pack acceptance.
    >>

    >
    >
    > No the manufacturers do.
    > caver1



    Yes... the manufacturer's need to make more "Linux Boxes" of software.

    That was funny.

    I sometimes drink...but not that much.

    --
    Hobbes, Tiger Extraordinaire


  8. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    Jose wrote:
    >

    snip
    > In any case, I won't be contributing to this thread any more. I
    > have stated my case, those who are in a good position to make it
    > happen and think it's a good idea already have it in their heads,
    > and those that don't fall into that category don't need to hear
    > any more about it from me.


    Jose, I had my say too, and fully intended to leave it at that,

    However I've just read an 'insiders' opinion that seemingly explains
    the background to this topic; and more.

    http://apcmag.com/why_i_quit_kernel_...on_kolivas.htm

    --
    Bob
    "I don't believe in evil, I believe in right and wrong, and very
    often they are the same thing"-Paul Theroux, in Milroy the Magician.

  9. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    Bob illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    > Jose wrote:
    >>

    > snip
    >> In any case, I won't be contributing to this thread any more. I
    >> have stated my case, those who are in a good position to make it
    >> happen and think it's a good idea already have it in their heads,
    >> and those that don't fall into that category don't need to hear
    >> any more about it from me.

    >
    > Jose, I had my say too, and fully intended to leave it at that,
    >
    > However I've just read an 'insiders' opinion that seemingly explains
    > the background to this topic; and more.
    >
    > http://apcmag.com/why_i_quit_kernel_...on_kolivas.htm


    Interesting read...although...methinks he has got pissed off with
    being ignored

    "Many of his experimental "-ck" patches, such as his prefetching and
    scheduling code, did not get merged with the official Linux kernel."

    From his wikipedia entry.

    Steer clear of a scorned Anaesthetist.

    --
    "I was sleeping the other night, alone, thanks to the exterminator." ~
    Emo Philips

  10. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    * Moog wrote in alt.os.linux.ubuntu:

    > Bob illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >> Jose wrote:
    >>>

    >> snip
    >>> In any case, I won't be contributing to this thread any more. I
    >>> have stated my case, those who are in a good position to make it
    >>> happen and think it's a good idea already have it in their heads,
    >>> and those that don't fall into that category don't need to hear
    >>> any more about it from me.

    >>
    >> Jose, I had my say too, and fully intended to leave it at that,
    >>
    >> However I've just read an 'insiders' opinion that seemingly explains
    >> the background to this topic; and more.
    >>
    >> http://apcmag.com/why_i_quit_kernel_...on_kolivas.htm

    >
    > Interesting read...although...methinks he has got pissed off with
    > being ignored
    >
    > "Many of his experimental "-ck" patches, such as his prefetching and
    > scheduling code, did not get merged with the official Linux kernel."
    >
    > From his wikipedia entry.
    >
    > Steer clear of a scorned Anaesthetist.
    >


    More on kernel hacki^H^H^H^ Programming:

    http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1...9462454,00.htm

    --
    David

  11. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    SINNER illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    > * Moog wrote in alt.os.linux.ubuntu:
    >
    >> Bob illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >>> Jose wrote:
    >>>>
    >>> snip
    >>>> In any case, I won't be contributing to this thread any more. I
    >>>> have stated my case, those who are in a good position to make it
    >>>> happen and think it's a good idea already have it in their heads,
    >>>> and those that don't fall into that category don't need to hear
    >>>> any more about it from me.
    >>>
    >>> Jose, I had my say too, and fully intended to leave it at that,
    >>>
    >>> However I've just read an 'insiders' opinion that seemingly explains
    >>> the background to this topic; and more.
    >>>
    >>> http://apcmag.com/why_i_quit_kernel_...on_kolivas.htm

    >>
    >> Interesting read...although...methinks he has got pissed off with
    >> being ignored
    >>
    >> "Many of his experimental "-ck" patches, such as his prefetching and
    >> scheduling code, did not get merged with the official Linux kernel."
    >>
    >> From his wikipedia entry.
    >>
    >> Steer clear of a scorned Anaesthetist.
    >>

    >
    > More on kernel hacki^H^H^H^ Programming:
    >
    > http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1...9462454,00.htm


    Indeed. It's perfectly obvious that Mr. Kolivas fell foul of
    something.

    As for the difficulty to get patches recognised and applied to the
    kernel....isn't that the way it should be?

    Jonathan Corbet's comment
    "A developer who does not understand the kernel community's ways (or,
    worse, who tries to flout or circumvent them) will have a frustrating
    experience in store,"

    Is perfectly understandable.

    --
    "Apparently, 1 in 5 people in the world are Chinese. And there are 5
    people in my family, so it must be one of them. It's either my mum or
    my dad. Or my older brother Colin. Or my younger brother Ho~Chan~Chu.
    But I think it's Colin." ~ Tim Vine

  12. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    Moog wrote:
    > Bob illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >> Jose wrote: snip
    >>> In any case, I won't be contributing to this thread any more.
    >>> I have stated my case, those who are in a good position to
    >>> make it happen and think it's a good idea already have it in
    >>> their heads, and those that don't fall into that category
    >>> don't need to hear any more about it from me.

    >> Jose, I had my say too, and fully intended to leave it at that,
    >>
    >> However I've just read an 'insiders' opinion that seemingly
    >> explains the background to this topic; and more.
    >>
    >> http://apcmag.com/why_i_quit_kernel_...on_kolivas.htm

    >
    > Interesting read...although...methinks he has got pissed off with
    > being ignored
    >
    > "Many of his experimental "-ck" patches, such as his prefetching
    > and scheduling code, did not get merged with the official Linux
    > kernel."
    >
    > From his wikipedia entry.
    >
    > Steer clear of a scorned Anaesthetist.
    >


    Moog, what's your assessment of Con's Unix claim?

    "The UNIX legacy was evident. We were shaping an operating system
    never designed for the desktop and it was going to hurt... a lot."

    I certainly can't dispute there's more ego than anything else behind
    *that* claim, so would be particularly interested in your opinion on
    that one.

    It will be interesting to see what the Chinese do, or don't do, with
    desktop hardware and Linux. http://www.linux.com/feature/144852
    Probably a million little Clive Sinclairs over there already
    experimenting with hardware and software.

    --
    Bob
    "I don't believe in evil, I believe in right and wrong, and very
    often they are the same thing"-Paul Theroux, in Milroy the Magician.



  13. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    Bob illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    > Moog wrote:
    >> Bob illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >>> Jose wrote: snip

    A>>>> In any case, I won't be contributing to this thread any more.
    >>>> I have stated my case, those who are in a good position to
    >>>> make it happen and think it's a good idea already have it in
    >>>> their heads, and those that don't fall into that category
    >>>> don't need to hear any more about it from me.
    >>> Jose, I had my say too, and fully intended to leave it at that,
    >>>
    >>> However I've just read an 'insiders' opinion that seemingly
    >>> explains the background to this topic; and more.
    >>>
    >>> http://apcmag.com/why_i_quit_kernel_...on_kolivas.htm

    >>
    >> Interesting read...although...methinks he has got pissed off with
    >> being ignored
    >>
    >> "Many of his experimental "-ck" patches, such as his prefetching
    >> and scheduling code, did not get merged with the official Linux
    >> kernel."
    >>
    >> From his wikipedia entry.
    >>
    >> Steer clear of a scorned Anaesthetist.
    >>

    >
    > Moog, what's your assessment of Con's Unix claim?
    >
    > "The UNIX legacy was evident. We were shaping an operating system
    > never designed for the desktop and it was going to hurt... a lot."


    I think he's posibly being swayed by the none inclusion of his
    desktop patches. Specifically his prefetch work.

    I empathise a little with him, as it is obviously very disillusioning
    to do a lot of work to get it ignored.

    Recently, the Linux kernel dev rules have been laid out, perhaps
    because of Kolivas experience. This should see an easier way to get
    decent code committed.

    > I certainly can't dispute there's more ego than anything else behind
    > *that* claim, so would be particularly interested in your opinion on
    > that one.


    It's not really *my* opinion, per se. It is common knowledge and is
    out their in webworld.

    > It will be interesting to see what the Chinese do, or don't do, with
    > desktop hardware and Linux. http://www.linux.com/feature/144852
    > Probably a million little Clive Sinclairs over there already
    > experimenting with hardware and software.


    It will indeed be very interesting to see how development of linux
    and FOSS in China will progress.

    --
    "So I went down my local ice~cream shop, and said 'I want to buy an
    ice~cream'. He said Hundreds & thousands?' I said 'We'll start with
    one.' He said 'Knickerbocker glory?' I said 'I do get a certain amount
    of freedom in these trousers, yes.' ~ Tim Vine

  14. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    Moog wrote:
    > Bob illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:


    snip

    >> Moog, what's your assessment of Con's Unix claim?
    >>
    >> "The UNIX legacy was evident. We were shaping an operating
    >> system never designed for the desktop and it was going to
    >> hurt... a lot."

    >
    > I think he's posibly being swayed by the none inclusion of his
    > desktop patches. Specifically his prefetch work.
    >
    > I empathise a little with him, as it is obviously very
    > disillusioning to do a lot of work to get it ignored.
    >
    > Recently, the Linux kernel dev rules have been laid out, perhaps
    > because of Kolivas experience. This should see an easier way to
    > get decent code committed.
    >
    >> I certainly can't dispute there's more ego than anything else
    >> behind *that* claim, so would be particularly interested in your
    >> opinion on that one.

    >
    > It's not really *my* opinion, per se. It is common knowledge and
    > is out their in webworld.


    Moog, my being completely ignorant at Unix level, I would appreciate
    your opinion of the Unix claim itself, not the alleged motives behind
    Con's claim.

    Partisan Ubuntu interests aside, is Unix intrinsically biased toward
    corporate needs, and against single user efficiency?


    >
    >> It will be interesting to see what the Chinese do, or don't do,
    >> with desktop hardware and Linux.
    >> http://www.linux.com/feature/144852 Probably a million little
    >> Clive Sinclairs over there already experimenting with hardware
    >> and software.

    >
    > It will indeed be very interesting to see how development of linux
    > and FOSS in China will progress.
    >


    Be a delightful irony if information/application censorship is
    defeated globally, from within China; in the next year or two.


    --
    Bob
    "I don't believe in evil, I believe in right and wrong, and very
    often they are the same thing"-Paul Theroux, in Milroy the Magician.

  15. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    Bob illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    > Moog wrote:
    >> Bob illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:

    >
    > snip
    >
    >>> Moog, what's your assessment of Con's Unix claim?
    >>>
    >>> "The UNIX legacy was evident. We were shaping an operating
    >>> system never designed for the desktop and it was going to
    >>> hurt... a lot."

    >>
    >> I think he's posibly being swayed by the none inclusion of his
    >> desktop patches. Specifically his prefetch work.
    >>
    >> I empathise a little with him, as it is obviously very
    >> disillusioning to do a lot of work to get it ignored.
    >>
    >> Recently, the Linux kernel dev rules have been laid out, perhaps
    >> because of Kolivas experience. This should see an easier way to
    >> get decent code committed.
    >>
    >>> I certainly can't dispute there's more ego than anything else
    >>> behind *that* claim, so would be particularly interested in your
    >>> opinion on that one.

    >>
    >> It's not really *my* opinion, per se. It is common knowledge and
    >> is out their in webworld.

    >
    > Moog, my being completely ignorant at Unix level, I would appreciate
    > your opinion of the Unix claim itself, not the alleged motives behind
    > Con's claim.


    I think the kernel is developed for both server, desktop and laptop
    usage. It is the basis for all linux distro's, and can be configured
    to take advantage of certain modules and patches depending on what
    hardware you run. There is prefetch involved in the Linux world,
    however, it seems his isn't. I can't comment overly much as I haven't
    the time or inclination to examine the code. Still, he may well have a
    valid grievance, or he may not. I would err caution in judging though.

    > Partisan Ubuntu interests aside, is Unix intrinsically biased toward
    > corporate needs, and against single user efficiency?


    Unix is. Yes. The linux kernel. I think it tries to encompass both. I
    think most of the desktop tweaking goes on afterwards. Ubuntu has a
    prefetch patch for its desktop that was modified during the google
    summer of code. It's not our friends though.

    >>> It will be interesting to see what the Chinese do, or don't do,
    >>> with desktop hardware and Linux.
    >>> http://www.linux.com/feature/144852 Probably a million little
    >>> Clive Sinclairs over there already experimenting with hardware
    >>> and software.

    >>
    >> It will indeed be very interesting to see how development of linux
    >> and FOSS in China will progress.
    >>

    >
    > Be a delightful irony if information/application censorship is
    > defeated globally, from within China; in the next year or two.


    Quite.

    --
    "When I wake up in the morning, I just can't get started until I've had
    that first, piping hot pot of coffee. Oh, I've tried other enemas..." ~
    Emo Philips

  16. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    Moog wrote:

    > "Many of his experimental "-ck" patches, such as his prefetching and
    > scheduling code, did not get merged with the official Linux kernel."
    >
    > From his wikipedia entry.


    Most of his patches didn't work very well. He had a few good ideas, but had
    an inflated sense of his own importance.

    C.

  17. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    Christopher Hunter wrote:
    > Moog wrote:
    >
    >> "Many of his experimental "-ck" patches, such as his prefetching
    >> and scheduling code, did not get merged with the official Linux
    >> kernel."
    >>
    >> From his wikipedia entry.

    >
    > Most of his patches didn't work very well. He had a few good
    > ideas, but had an inflated sense of his own importance.
    >
    > C.


    Wouldn't that also be true of most, if not all, Linux developers?

    Being a one computer home user, seems to me that regardless of his
    competence, or lack of competence, Con Kolivas had been batting on my
    behalf. The interview,
    http://apcmag.com/why_i_quit_kernel_...on_kolivas.htm
    obviously wasn't news to Linux 'insiders" but it was news, and
    beneficial, to me.


    --
    Bob
    "I don't believe in evil, I believe in right and wrong, and very
    often they are the same thing"-Paul Theroux, in Milroy the Magician.

  18. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    On 2008-08-16, Jose wrote:
    > On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 21:27:11 -0500, Joe wrote:
    >
    >> That's fine if it works. The problem is that sometimes it doesn't. And
    >> then, you are not expected to edit a text config file, but the Windows
    >> registry. And when you screw that up, you don't lose your video for a
    >> few minutes, you lose much more...

    >
    > True.
    >
    >> Linux would be far better off if there was a comprehensive Hardware
    >> Compatibility List showing which devices will work out of the box. Then,
    >> if someone decides to use something not on the list, they go into it
    >> knowing that there can (and likely will) be problems...

    >
    > True. But this doesn't invalidate my point that Linux would be better
    > off with a comprehensive configuration list too.


    A comprehensive configuration list just isn't feasible. You'd need
    people inputting tested directions for each and every new piece of
    hardware, as it is released. And then, you are relying on the same
    thing you are now, just in a different place. I wouldn't expect to
    see such an effort from the distributions themselves. Remember, these
    are free OS', and there's only so much you can expect to get form
    people for free...

    >
    > A FAQ with full answers, as it were, because these (how do I get Ubuntu
    > to recognize my monitor?...) actually =are= frequently asked.


    You buy a monitor that is supported. Same as if you own a Windows
    machine (and YES, there are monitors that don't work well with
    Windows, without tweaking).


    --
    Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
    joe at hits - buffalo dot com
    "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
    time..." - Danny, American History X

  19. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    On 2008-08-16, Jose wrote:
    > On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 09:24:22 -0500, John F. Morse wrote:
    >
    >> This information is readily available, Jose. You just don't know yet
    >> where to look, or maybe have overlooked it.

    >
    > Or maybe am putting together used equipment without a manual. In any
    > case, I =do= know where to look, I =have= looked it up, I =have= edited
    > my config file, and my monitor is working well.
    >
    > It's not about me.


    Sure it is, or you probably wouldn't have brought it up...

    >
    > It's about whether the Linux community wants to be a techie club ("we
    > paid our dues, so you should too") or whether it wants to actually get
    > Joe Sixpack to try Linux and like it, scoring another victory against the
    > Closed Source Monster.


    It isn't about competition. It's about choice. Joe sixpack can
    decide what he wants, and it's fine so long as he goes into the
    situation knowing that he'll have to work for it. Microsoft wants a
    couple hundred bucks for the OS, Linux sometimes takes a little sweat
    and effort...

    >
    > For that matter, man pages are just there for those too lazy to
    > experiment with the software, right?


    Of course not. The man pages are invaluable for those that want to
    experiment with the software.

    >
    > I just made a suggestion that a certain form of documentation would make
    > a world of difference for new people. It would address a problem with
    > Linux not recognizing certain hardware automatically (a problem which
    > appears from postings to be rather common, though it shouldn't be), and
    > give new people an easy first step into the world of manual configuration.


    But who is going to maintain it? It may be a fine idea, but you are
    not preaching to "Linux", as "Linux" isn't an entity that can do what
    you ask. It is a community, and you can be a part of it. You already
    have installed the OS, now if you think something will make the world
    better, have at it!

    >
    > I don't see why there is such hostility towards that.


    What hostility?

    >
    > ... then Dragomir Kollaric said:
    >
    >> Me thinks you are a troll, sorry this is the impression I get.

    >
    > Think what you want.


    We all do, invariably.

    --
    Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
    joe at hits - buffalo dot com
    "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
    time..." - Danny, American History X

  20. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    On 2008-08-16, LittleGorm wrote:
    > I must agree with Jose. If indeed the Linux community really wants to
    > expand, it must make setting up a system easier. I saw in one of the
    > replies that "setting up a database of monitors....etc.." Well now you
    > know why Microsoft charges for Windows. They had to do that. That is part
    > of the cost of Windows. Obviously the Linux community cannot do that. But
    > there is a great deal that it can do to make setting the system up.
    > However, the community is going to have to decide, do you want to be some
    > kind of techie exclusive club (this reminds me of the old amateur radio
    > geeks or Hams who insisted on using Morse Code) or do you want to be a
    > bit more inclusive and bring in a much larger base. I hope it is the
    > latter.


    The "community" doesn't decide anything. If you have an idea that you
    think will be of benefit, you are free to do it. Then you create a
    web site for it, or a project page at something like sourceforge. Now
    people can download your work and use it, and if enough people
    absolutely love it, and it achieves your goal, it will likely end up
    as a part of most distributions.

    There is no governing body here deciding what apps make up "Linux".
    But good apps, that make linux better, are constantly added to
    distributions everywhere.

    The first time I tried Linux, it had no working media players. Xine
    was out there and available, but if you wanted it you had to download
    it, compile it and configure it. Many people did this, but it was a
    pain. Eventually, it became a part of many distributions, and for the
    ones that didn't include it by default, they set up packages and
    placed them in their repositories. That is how things work in this
    world.


    --
    Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
    joe at hits - buffalo dot com
    "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
    time..." - Danny, American History X

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast