Age has nothing to do with that. I cut my teeth on 8-bit BASIC, but Microsoft had nothing to do with the implementation. And while I did use Windows for a while in my teens before I matured into a *nix user, those were the days before Microsoft's monopoly abuse had quite destroyed all competition in the markets they chose to enter, so I was able to choose from a range of development tool providers (and chose Borland).
No, it's not. Do Slashdotters really believe this? Clang/LLVM is the driving free-as-in-speech compiler suite these days.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
Clang is the up-and-coming challenger, and it looks pretty inevitable that it's going to win eventually. But the world moves slower than you might like. Right now, clang is so far from taking over from GCC that it's not even funny.
Just because Apple uses something doesn't mean it dominates everything else in the world. Everywhere I look that isn't Apple, I see either GCC or ICC. In much of industry, people are only just starting to migrate from old vendor compilers to GCC as part of the slow ongoing UNIX-to-Linux shift.
I gave up on KDE when I discovered it is practically impossible to copy my settings from one computer to another.
Having a highly-customizable experience is great until you buy a new box and discover you're either going to waste hours reproducing your customizations manually, or try to copy things, have it break, and experience the hell of grepping for hardcoded paths in undocumented XML soup.
That's when I realized I wasn't even using much more than the window manager and the panel anyway, so I switched to FVWM2, whose configuration is stored in a single human-readable text file, and had a setup that was even more to my tastes, cloned across all my computers, in minutes.
KDE is undoubtedly awesome, but simplicity is also a feature, and it's one that the monolithic environments cannot provide -- by design.
The 4-digit PIN normally only applies to buttons that you push with your finger, where brute-force attacks are not really an option. If your bank has ATMs that permit 10,000 attempts before they swallow the card, or uses a 4-digit PIN as a password for their online services, I suggest you take your money elsewhere.
Does anyone here encipher their paper mail?
lgnge nfiax paavb fxvzv abval agrrh rcjnf zvarp rnrfy agrgj
zvpju rrgrr rnirr qfvvy bfrcn pbfun lgbur oofqf ffbqp vggrz
hrwug vfprn tcagp pupee buegr vnrnf nxpty lhrau nyoay oheva
Does Chrome have the ability yet to make text a readable size without widening the page so I have to scroll sideways?
Does it have the ability to selectively stop/play animations?
No? Then I'll be sticking with Firefox a while longer, I guess. Come back when your browser's accessible and then we'll talk.
You have some powerfully tinted rose-colored goggles if you want OS X to look like OS 9.
The desktop, perhaps.
The Finder, on the other hand
I'm looking forward to someone/some company doing something truly original.
"There is nothing new under the sun" -- some old guy who lived thousands of years ago.
Not much has changed since then.
Even the iPad is pretty much just one of those things they were using in Star Trek in the 1960s, which in turn were straight extrapolations from the clipboard, which in turn bears a remarkable functional resemblance to the clay tablets used to record the Epic of fucking Gilgamesh way back before Solomon even observed the general absence of novelty in the world.
"Innovation" means "being first to market with the obvious idea everyone is working on." It always has. Look how many people "invented" the light-bulb, or the airplane, or the tele(vision|phone), all at the same time, so their respective countries of residence have spent the last 150-odd years arguing patriotically over who reached the patent office first (hint: it was probably Edison, who literally worked there).
"Something truly new" does not, cannot, exist. It is a myth. When Apple claim to have invented something new, what they mean is that they have taken an old idea, polished it slightly, and will now use their impressive marketing machinery to make people want to buy it. This is clever, impressive, and has contributed significantly to our society's evolution in recent years, but it is not "innovation".
"The Desktop" is and has always been nothing but a very poor metaphor anyway. Get your damn desktop off my root window!
;)
Damn right. The purpose of the root window is to provide something to click on to display the main menu, and somewhere to place iconified windows. Kids these days with their "shortcut icons" and "widgets"
I can accept complains about "/opt" and "/usr/local" - they might not make much sense nowadays
Really? Where would you suggest I install software that doesn't come from my distro's repositories, then? Because I'm sure as hell not going to put it in plain
Something Fedora is missing here is that it's not the separate directories that confuse people, it's the abbreviations.
Something you're missing here is that this proposal has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with new users or anyone being "confused" by anything. This is entirely about the technical benefits Fedora believes would be provided by having all distro-controlled binaries and libraries stored within
And THIS is why I switched away from Ubuntu long ago.
Please, Ubuntu guys, learn the concept of a "showstopper". You should not release software with major known bugs. Is your release schedule really more important than your users' computers working properly?
ACT-UP and Stallman may have been needed at one point, but ultimately do more harm to their own cause then they realize.
Thank you for your concern.
Funny thing: there are huge numbers of people like you, who are always ready to tell anyone who stands up for a cause that they are doing it wrong and would be far better off just sitting back down again and not rocking the boat. There are far fewer people like Stallman who are actually ready to do the standing up. Which do you think has a more beneficial effect on society?
To put it another way: without Stallman, I would be typing this on a computer that was bound by restrictive EULAs that would prevent me from knowing how it worked or modifying it to suit my needs. He clearly knows a thing or two about software freedom. What have you accomplished that gives you the authority to claim you know better than him how to achieve his goals?
(Also, I find it bizarre that you equate issuing a press release you don't like with throwing blood at people. Really, you're going with that? Wow.)
This is British Airways we're talking about, not Southwest or Ryanair. BA does not charge hidden fees for everything. In-flight food and drink, a reasonable number of checked bags, etc. are all provided at no extra cost.
(The downside is that BA tickets are more expensive up-front. You pays your money and you takes your choice: put up with sleazy nickel-and-diming scumbags, or pay a premium to receive premium service?)
Target size. More people are looking for Windows exploits, and given the choice between exploiting Windows or exploiting OpenBSD, the average cybercriminal is going to go after Windows every time.
(Had this been asking about e.g. web servers rather than main personal computers, things would be different -- Linux is a very attractive target in that area and often exploited, and I bet OpenBSD is not immune or ignored either -- but that wasn't the question.)
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things. -- Doug Gwyn
