Think of them as two portrait-mode displays side-by-side with no annoying bezel.
Those are two *very* *small* portrait-mode displays.
I know some people do not mind squinting at monitor whole day - heck, some even like the light background. But I like my bgs dark and fonts large. And you can't fit that on a small display. Even if you have two of them.
P.S. - Samsung, in no way, is a good company. They are bribery committing, price fixing, colluding, thieves - all convictions in a court of law.
Name one company which isn't.
All companies do it.
If found, pay fines, downplay it in media, and then proceed with the business as usual.
Would a square display be of any benefit to you?
Most definitely yes.
WA displays are simply too wide. And in portrait orientation, they are too narrow.
I want my 4:3 or 5:4 back. 1:1 seems like a good compromise.
But I doubt that I will get one. For home, I want a WA for movies/etc. For office... I have little control over what junk IT buys. I bet the monitor would cost premium, and as such ordering one would be out of the question.
Ah. This "Software is hard" post again. All it talks about is the Red Hat (and GNU) own incompetence. They tend to overdesign greatly for no good reason, and then complain that they can't make the shit work together.
This is the signature of GNU (GNOME) and many things RH does: over-desgined and over-engineered solution, simplified and generalized to hell. (As if repeating sendmail.cf fiasco is their ultimate goal.) Getting done anything complicated is hard, because it is way too generalized and simplified. Getting it changed is hard because it is too large, since it is over-desgined and over-engineered.
Frankly, though, all this are signs of predominant immaturity and inexperience among the software developers. They grew in this GNU influenced culture where never finishing anything to the end is a norm of life. And thus they simply have no experience in making stuff work in the end and, instead of finishing it and learning from the mistakes of how it doesn't work, they generally choose the path of reinventing stuff by learning from the mistakes of how the (unproven) design didn't worked for them as developers. And that leads eventually to over-desgin and over-engineering. Most of the GNOME, SystemD, polkit, udev, avahi, a good deal of RH proprietary tools I had to deal with - are all very good examples of it.
Admit it, after the systemd has won the CTTE vote, you were just looking for a pretext to run away.
Because, politicking aside, there is a huge HUGE pile of work coming the way of Debian's systemd package.
And out of people who can actually shoulder the work, in any comprehensible fashion, most are actually in anti-systemd camp. That was visible already during the CTTE "discussions." The person who was fixing people's Debian installations, broken by GNOME/systemd dependency was actually the Vorlon, Steve Langasek, the upstart maintainer. Oh the irony. (While you and GNOME maintainers happily buried your heads in the sand and said "not our problem". That was pretty much the moment when systemd lost me, definitively.)
FreeBSD outperforms Linux only in certain scenarios. In most common cases you would hardly find any difference. Otherwise.
It is not the problem that Linux network stack sucks. The problem is that linux-netdev people believe that Linux network stack is already perfect.
AND. The biggest problem is with the certain Linus Torwalds who insists on perfect design for any net redesign.
That's why we still do not have interrupt polling/interrupt throttling or anything like pf.
That's why we have the technically perfect ip - but totally unusable to literally any human being. And the iptables with near O(n) performance.
It's basically the same story as with the sound subsystem. As long as the design is good, it doesn't matter that the end result sucks.
Quirky syntax - which unlike Perl in places is mandatory in Go! - killed my interest in it pretty early.
Still there are very few applications that are more “sticky” than databases, which after typically contains the keys to the kingdom.
DBs are rarely a problem. But DBAs and developers are the problem.
I had limited to exposure to Sybase and MySQL, before spending several years with a company deeply tied to Oracle RDBMS.
Most developers and DBAs are completely clueless about competitive alternatives. Over the years I have heard so much blatantly stupid crap, that it is even hard to believe that it can come from a person with higher education. MySQL can't transactions. Sybase locks completely everything for every update statement. You can't backup MySQL DB. There is no admin interface in Sybase. PL/SQL is Oracle specific, thus server side functionality can only be implemented with Oracle. Only Oracle implements server-side Java, thus you can connect from Java only to the Oracle DB. And so on.
With this mentality, several projects which required a local DB were stonewalled and simply buried. MySQL (aka MariaDB) was a viable candidate - in fact already successfully deployed by other R&Ds in other locations for the similar purpose - but people more or less refused to even learn how to work with it. Couple of open-minded developers within week actually ported the Java-based software to MySQL, but nobody was listening to them, because, duh, MySQL is impossible to work with.
Because somebody or something has to start the syslogd too.
What the fuck is the relevance of that? syslogd gets started by magic in sysvinit?
No.
But as long as your shell doesn't randomly crashes, and one of the first lines in the rcS is something like 'rsyslogd &', and rsyslogd doesn't crash - the syslogd will be definitively and certainly started.
You can call it magic, though, if you want. Because that's not something systemd can guaranteee.
I may be naïve but I've been debugging problems in the sysv boot process since 1994.
Ditto, since 1997. Though, I have to admit, I have spent very little time debugging them: they 99.999% of time it just works. And it also work very well in edge cases like brining up a server from the dead, after catastrophic hardware failure or a simply broken upgrade.
Because somebody or something has to start the syslogd too.
You naive people do not even grasp how deep that jar or worms, known as the boot process, goes...
Wise men of old wrote it in shell for lots and lots of good reasons.
Looks far more like a smarter version of Sonos, at the same price point.
They are only cutting the subsidies.
The market has established itself: subsidies are not needed anymore.
Just like the article says in the third paragragh.
Most of our leaders, at least in Germany and Hungary, are in bed with the Russians and likely won't do anything about fuel security.
I do not know about Hungary, but Germany is heavily investing in the renewable energy.
Or you expected them to immediately cut the pipes? halt production and transportation? cut the forests to heat the homes?
I recently updated my LinkedIn settings to say "don't contact me about job opportunities." I like my current job and don't expect to find a better deal anywhere else (decent salary, great coworkers, WFH).
As soon as I put up the "don't contact me" marker, the number of pings I get from recruiters doubled. Still offering the same depressing-sounding jobs with long commutes. I guess saying you're not interested piques their interest.
systemd 204 is the last systemd release where some of its services can be used with the systemd-shim and without systemd as pid 1.
Ubuntu ships 204 for some time too, since GNOME requires the services.
Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They eat Twinkies and Szechwan food.
