Re: True innovation
> Unlike Android of course, built on an OS that pre-dates Windows NT.
NT is a VMS knockoff. So that means that it is no spring chicken either.
2183 posts • joined 26 Jan 2009
> Unlike Android of course, built on an OS that pre-dates Windows NT.
NT is a VMS knockoff. So that means that it is no spring chicken either.
Linux is better up to the task because it is a better server OS and is more flexible. If you wanted to get all PHB about the situation you could replace AIX with Linux and still end up with something that won't cause professionals to snicker behind your back.
Windows is for small businesses that can't afford IT staff.
> window move requires an application to respond to a move event before the move happens, resulting in freezing
...which they could refactor by using the BeOS "thread everything" approach or by using the X11 approach of having a separate window manager. Bad apps wet themselves but the rest of the system chugs happily along.
Although that's the PROGRAMMER's interface rather than the USER's interface.
So bringing that up is a big of a red herring.
That's like saying you can't build something like Cinnamon because you went from GNOME2 to GNOME3.
> Because most of the improvements under the bonnet come from clearing out cruft related to the previous UI decisions.
That's just gibberish. What's underneath has nothing to do with the UI. You can still have the old UI with the allegedly better internals.
Your comment rates right up there with IE4 being inseparable from Windows.
> Even a hardened downloader would struggle passed 10 - 20 TB?
Take what an American spends on cable. Apply it to spinny media and streaming downloads.
In about 6 years you will pass the 10TB mark.
You are confused.
The OS of choice for thieves is Windows. Windows is the pirates paradise. Always has been.
If you hang out with the "freetards" you run the risk of bumping into someone that's a stickler for licensing.
> True, but how much of it do you actually go back and watch even once?
That's a separate issue. Even if I only watch something once, it will be a much better experience if it is coming from my own media horde, on my own high speed network, using my own chosen player.
Since it's under my control, I have all the time in the world to get around to it. I will never have to worry that someone's licensed expired. I won't have to ever deal with network outages or bandwidth caps.
Space is cheap. Content is also cheap.
Microsoft dominance of desktop computers is why tablets seem so appealing to the common man.
Apple gave up declaring that their PC fixes the problems of the WinDOS PC once they discovered that they got much more traction by taking the same approach with tablets. They no longer had to fight 30 years of mindless Lemming troll FUD.
Tablets seem new enough that people can get past their old computing fears.
Meanwhile 5 year old PCs continue to chug along and run circles around ARM devices when it's time to actually compute something or do work.
You laugh but I already do this sort of thing with my truck.
Sooner or later, there's bound to be a 1TB one in there. It's just a matter of time. The one that's there now would have been considered science fiction when some of the files on it were originally created.
> Probably because it's such old news that no one really cares...
Of course it's "old". It goes all the way back to the first time Apple's name meant something.
IBM triggered something that would marginalize Apple for the next 20 years still seems to still be a menace to Apple despite an apparent surrender. There's more to tech than what a modern feeble attention span can manage to focus on.
I'm surprised no one has yet pointed out the fact that Lenovo is in fact the re-animated corpse of the IBM PC division. It's a Zombie version of IBM that seems poised to smack down Apple.
Seems kind of hilarious really, especially since HP was going to jettison it's PC division too.
I have gotten 100MB/s out of my wired GigE network. That was driven by a single big-but-cheap spinny disk.
Your spinny disk is the real bottleneck, not the external storage bus.
Given what generally tends to be in "app stores", that's not much of a tragedy.
RHEL is meant to run kilobuck commercial software with similarly expensive support contracts. They aren't your casual sort of end user thing. Contracts and haggling are involved.
Lack of access to Adware versions of things that are better as user compiled Free Software is not such a tragedy.
What's the matter? All of the ARM fanboys like to claim how powerful new models of ARM CPUs are.
If ARM is really all that then it certainly can handle a little emulation.
It may not be good enough for T2F or WoW but it should be fine for those legacy office apps.
Sometimes people need to do some work and excuses aren't going to get the job done.
There is nothing reliable about Windows.
Once you've got things set up so that your box is booting straight into your app, ease and complexity are no longer a factor. You might even be using the exact same app.
Unix tends to be much better at staying in place and is much more maleable beforehand.
You should have seen that one coming a mile away and just ripped everything.
Operating one PVR versus another is not the issue. They are all appliances once you've built them. The problem is buidling them and using monopolyware is no gaurantee that things will be trouble free.
It's like building any PC. YMMV. Your tuner may be unsupported (even in WMC) or your remote make have all sorts of problems (even in Windows).
My multi-room setup isn't even supported in WMC.
I have seen exactly ONE media center machine in the wild.
It was being sold by the local uber-geek computer shop. It came with a DVD carousel too. Only time I ever saw that in the wild either. It was an expensive beast that made me glad I opted for a ripper based alternative.
People not knowing about MCE is a little like people not knowing about Archos media players and pre-iPad tablet PCs. You can't blame people for not knowing about that which is not advertised or available in OEM form.
Now that I think about it, it's a tad like Linux. '-p
It really is "that big a deal".
It's disruptive to the people that stuff want/need to get stuff done.
The "features" are largely irrelevant.
As with GNOME, you simply don't need to break the old stuff to add new stuff. It's shameless incompetence all around.
I have a Plex server running on my master backend (MythTV).
It runs as well there as it does anywhere. Same challenges and quirks as running on a Mac or a Windows PC.
Modern digital TV uses the same codecs as DVDs. There's really no getting around supporting DVD playback in a PVR. You can skip the DVD navigation stuff and the CSS decryption stuff. However, the "meat" of the DVD format is unavoidable.
Also, selling the end user half a solution just makes the result a usability nightmare.
It's far better to build a complete product and charge extra for it if necessary.
Although based on all of the noise that gets directed at Linux, any modern OS is supposed to be able to handle DVD playback and BluRay playback and Quicktime playback all without any placing any burdens on the end user.
It costs ~ $20 per year to provide guide data for users of non-commercial PVR apps. Instead of just being a jerk and cutting everyone off, Microsoft could have just done what the "hobbyists" have done and provided a means for current users to continue to get data.
They could even charge money for it.
One simply does not need to be the biggest jerk possible. You don't need to abuse "minorities".
> it's a matter of opinion. I miss slides, and so do my friends. There's no magic in watching digital photos, all 10 billion of them, on a computer screen. Even as "large" as 27 inch or so.
This is 2013. Display them on your telly. Buy an Apple streamer if you have to.
There's really no reason to be limited to a 27 inch monitor anymore.
> However if you've never seen a quality slide esp. 2.25" square blown up to 4m * 4m they you haven't seen a photographic image.
Meh. Just use a video projector. Plug it into your WMC box if you have too.
I take the other side of the argument. Apple fans like to crow about how Apple products are somehow a sign of wealth and affluence and that competing products are a demonstration of the reverse.
....well if that's really so then these kids should be able to just BUY their own Apple devices.
Then there are hand-me-downs to consider. There are generations of iThings out there now.
Being given an Apple product is like being given a pamphlet for a religious cult.
In order to use it, you have to buy into a whole set of other nonsense that you just may not be interested in.
The whole "ecosystem" argument cuts both ways.
No. This is all clueless conspicuous consumers that can't be bothered to actually know anything about the people they are buying gifts for. Throwing money at the problem is no cure for being thoughtless.
The point here is that your relatives should have a clue. They should know you and consider that when shopping for you. What they come up with should not show a complete lack of regard for who you are or what you like.
Wasting a lot of money on something that the recipient really doesn't want is just a big demonstration of your own stupidity and shallowness.
Better a trivial bauble that shows a bit of thought.
Someone has to play the role of the Duke of Milan. Otherwise stuff doesn't get built for lack of funding.
> Gosh, I must have imagined all those Firewire based video cameras that dominated the market from about 1999 to 2009?
It's 2013 now. If you have to bring up the past and then EXAGGERATE it, then you are only proving my point.
Firewire was already pretty effectively marginalized by 2009 even in video cameras.
Firewire simply lost. Get over it. It seemed like a better technology once. However, the market moved in another direction. It's time to stop living in the past. It's time to stop pretending that you're some sort of artist.
Thunderbolt certainly has some challenges when compared to Firewire. Firewire failed in the market and it didn't have nearly the cost gap as Thunderbolt has against it's rivals.
Excuses don't negate security issues.
If extra speed comes at a cost you aren't willing to take, then it doesn't matter how fast it is.
Got a router, TV, BluRay player, Cable box, PVR, or PHONE.
Then you already have Linux.
Linux is already quite "mainstream". It just hasn't displaced WinDOS.
Once you ditch legacy WinDOS apps anything is possible. Although chances are that the future vision of this concept will be based on x86 chips because corporations simply can't get over their Windows habit.
So you make money by being on the leading edge. You make money selling early access to that. You provide a well tested system. You have the fastest response time with fixes. You provide useful enhancements.
Being the reference platform for Steam should be worth something.
Being the reference platform for Oracle is worth something to Red Hat and Suse.
If you think you can't make money with GPL./Linux then you just aren't cut out for this stuff.
What Apple innovated was CHEAP.
Tablets were not CHEAP until the iPad came along.
This wasn't about "usability" or the "walled garden", this was about CHEAP.
No one wanted $2000 tablets. Many of us fixated on the notion of an x86 Apple tablet gravely misjudged what the iPad would be. We were thinking MacOS tablet rather than a scaled up iPod (like the Archos 9).
CHEAP is what tablets have going for them. This greatly reduces the risks involved in trying something new. It can be a total bust and you aren't really out much.
> Canonical is well known for making practical concessions to the reality of big box retail like the licensing of H,264.
So that's why Mint gained so much traction by installing things like h264 support "out of the box"?
Your portrayal of Canonical is divorced from reality.
> Beyond tradition, is there any reason why an OS search field shouldn't also search the internet?
The further you get from a register in the microprocessor, the slower things get. The slowness grows by multiple orders of magnitude each time you move outward. By the time you get to an ethernet jack or wireless antenna, you've gotten to a snail's pace and high response times (latency).
Go beyond your own router and it only gets worse.
The privacy violations are just an added bonus.
No. They're just base and crass for other reasons.
Universities are supposed to help improve the state of the art. They aren't supposed to be another form of bridge troll. They're supposed to be the counterpoint to companies that don't do anything without getting their proverbial palms greased.
Academics like to claim to be above such things.
More likely you've got a split between n00bs and power users and both are cost conscious once you get beyond Apple users. Both netbooks and ultrabooks fail to compete against tablets on the lowend and more powerful laptops on the high end.
PC users probably aren't interested in the expensive shiny shiny that an ultrabook represents.
It's almost like PC users remain PC users because they aren't interested in the options Apple offers.
> My Sun 3 in mid '80s had a 1152x900 monitor on it.
It also was generally not purchased by individuals and was more than an expensive car.
That was probably also just a Mono monitor.
You're not the only person that used SunOS in the 80s.
What you are talking about was an overpriced DESKTOP monitor. It wasn't even terribly common.
This is LAPTOPS we're talking about here. They are different beasts for obvious reasons.
Some of us REMEMBER this stuff firsthand and don't have to grope Google for it.
> But what actually happened to force Windows on the market was people bringing back 'broken' netbooks to the shop in droves
This is just FUD that was never really substantiated by anyone including the alleged source.
When netbooks were first introduced, they included hardware on which XP would not run.
Subsequent XP netbooks were more powerfully equipped. Linux netbooks often weren't upgraded.
So any preferences there aren't purely about the operating system.
> I really don't understand the 'war' between Apple device and Linux users.
Apple and Linux representing diametrically opposed design philosophies.
Calling Apple products "Unix derived" ignores most of the defining qualities of Unix. Here it is useful to distinguish between kernels and the user level interfaces. Linux isn't just Linux. It's also GNU. Whereas MacOS is a proprietary interface that's bolted on top. Any kernel could be under there.
It's Linux that has a Unix interface bolted on top of it.
Get beyond that and you have "why not" versus "justify yourself".
If you are the least bit creative, you will find Apple has put barriers in your way and you will find the Apple user community belittling you and what you want to do.
MacOS is not Unix. Neither is PhoneOS.
...it's like Windows users don't do anything else with their machines but start the OS and start applications.
Are they constantly crashing or something? Otherwise that metric should be pretty meaningless in 2012.
Also, Windows has a nasty habit of appearing to be started but not being really terribly useful. So these startup metrics can be intentionally misleading. They're a bad thing to judge anything on.
When is it useful?
> The one thing that unix does well is 1982.
So that's why it's in your phone, in your tablet, in your TV, in your cable box, in your BluRay player, in your PVR, at your bank, managing your paycheck?
The entire article is silly troll bait. Linux is already in tablets. It's presence will likely blunt Windows.
This tech hasn't been around long enough to be "time tested". It needs to be handled accordingly. Thus, I always check the end user reviews and see what products may be a bad egg (and avoid those).
At this point, reliability seems to be a bigger problem than speed.
So speed focused reviews are less interesting. At this point I don't care so much whether or not one of these can keep up with on of my spinny disk arrays.
Prosecute the victim.
If Netflix is just building on Silverlight then there's a good chance that it is their suppliers like Microsoft that are the real patent violators here. Netflix just seems to be using someone else's software. They aren't the real "violator" here.
Given the history of this sort of thing, the timing and choice of target seems suspicious here. This case should have been filed sooner and probably against Apple rather than Netflix.
Such a dual port scheme would also allow you to use expansion products for your Apple devices while also being able to charge your device. You wouldn't be left in a situation where you can't really fully take advantage of all your doodads because you'll run out of power.
Sometimes I wonder if those blindly devoted to Apple do much of anything with their overpriced tokens of conspicuous consumption.