Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Good for them (Score 1) 123

I agree, the way they use all their products as vehicles for their other products is wrong, and that's what the EU should focus on, not the browsers so much.

Take DirectX for example, if it was developed by a separate company they would make cross-platform implementations so they can sell their game development tools, etc. to a wider audience, that is the logical move. However, Microsoft just use it to strengthen their Windows monopoly, a move which is illegal under EU law, and should be stopped.

To be honest I think the EU should just force Microsoft to co-operate on producing a cross-platform DirectX implementation (and possibly more of the Windows API like .NET etc.) to stop people being locked-in to Windows. Of course, this would basically kill Windows so MS will resist it at all costs.

Comment Re:Stealth (Score 1) 129

I loved playing Pandora Tomorrow over XBConnect. It was a bit too easy to learn the levels off by heart as the spy and sneak through to near the objective without triggering any cameras.

Penumbra: Overture is a pretty good horror game for having to flee. Same with Call Of Cthulu: Dark Corners of the Earth.

Comment Re:Why do the charities want censorship? (Score 1) 281

Yeah, I refuse to donate to 'mainstream' charity for reasons just like that. I don't think they approach it properly - it's better to get an organized government approach IMO than just throwing money at the problems.

I donate to the FSF, etc. though where I can see the money is being used well and gathered fairly.

Comment Re:That's not okay. (Score 1) 911

"(1) has windows UI"
Could you clarify what is so special and necessary about the Windows UI. I find Explorer to be horribly slow for file management, especially whn they bloated it even more in Vista.

"(2) can run all software I want to use (either runs the same program or has an alternative)"
Most software has a decent alternative, unless you have learnt how to use a particular program very well, the alternatives are normally good. You could always try WINE too.

"(3) use setup.exe (.sh, .whatever) file for installation of additional software that do not depend on some third party (apt-get, yum) database and have all needed files included (.so files, .dll files) (can have some exceptions, like LinuxD3D, Lin.net, LinVBrun)"
There are .deb's etc. available to do that, but package management is much better than the horror of Windows' Add/Remove programs - a legacy of the time before modern internet when you installed programs from 20 floppies.

"(4) is compatible with majority of old software, written 15 years ago"
More programs written 15 years ago run on my GNU/Linux box than my Windows one. (All the GNU core utils for a start :P) and MS broke a lot of compatibility with Vista.

"(5) uses GUI (for most options) or registry (for obscure options) for configuration, instead of text files"
Text config files are much less cryptic than the registry IMO, they are also much easier to restore and share. There are GUIs available for most of the config, I've only had to touch Xorg.conf when Cedega broke it. "(6) supports any currently made device that Windows supports (including a USB thermometer)"
Buy devices with open specifications or Open Source drivers. We aren't magicians, we need the specifications to make drivers.

"(7) is compatible with games"
There aren't many good GNU/Linux games, I'll admit but I play CS1.6 and Oblivion in WINE. But again, this is really a problem of basically saying I will use GNU/Linux if it is Windows.

"(8) is so better (faster, more stable) than windows that I do not mind reinstalling the OS."
The Freedom of using GNU/Linux is already well worth installing the OS for. It doesn't take long, nor is it binding, and you can try it out. It's well worth just being free from malware, etc. for a start.

But ultimately it's your choice, you don't have to use GNU/Linux, but if you don't want to use it, please don't make shallow excuses as to why you would.

Comment Has it ever worked? (Score 1) 425

Has this idea ever worked? Most sites that go pay-to-view just have a huge loss in traffic as people look elsewhere, they hardly have a monopoly on the news.

This is why I love the BBC, just pay the license fee and you get loads of great programmes and news, they make great documentaries as they needn't worry so much about profits and ratings (perhaps more so as we lower the TV license - tbh I think they'd do better taking it out of tax as there'd be no cost of enforcement and it'd mean people using only the iPlayer still pay their fair share without draconian DRM being installed).

But anyway, back on subject, having a government sponsored news agency can be good. I'd worry the AP would be too open to accept bribes to censor/editorialize stories under this model.

Slashdot Top Deals

"It says he made us all to be just like him. So if we're dumb, then god is dumb, and maybe even a little ugly on the side." -- Frank Zappa

Working...