Anyone want to surmise whether we'll get a desktop machine anytime soon?
Quite fancy a 5Ghz desktop beast running Amiga OS 4.
Just imagine - Full - motion - video. Less than 0 second shutdowns. Deluxe paint loading quicker than you can thumb a floppy in.
Or you could run ubuntu and have the dash load up in the time-frame your short-term memory works in.
D
I will admit that if I see anyone with one of these Ubuntu phones, I'm going to be quite a smidgen jealous!
D
The problem is that the 'enthusiasts' who would be contributing to this have just recently had several slaps to the face from Canonical in the form of window buttons, unity, unity & unity. And amazon shopping lenses. 'This is not a democracy' is still rings in the ears. Now Canonical realise that they need the enthusiasts, who's toes they stepped on, to help with this venture into the mobile space.
To be honest, I hope they succeed. I think the concept of a phone that doubles as a desktop could very well be the future of the desktop computer for many people. The hardware also looks very nice (which is a necessity to tempt anyone off android/ios) - I agree with Shuttleworth that mobile screen resolution is getting out of hand, and I'd much rather the colourful OLED displays than the ridiculously high res LCDs (which then look laggy because the graphics can't keep up - see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmywUhu2Pus) and a sapphire glass screen sounds interesting (though will it be as strong as gorilla glass - I doubt it).
I wonder how many of us would have paid up if Nokia had done this with the N950?
here's the basic premise in the founding of the enlightenment model US (boiled down):
rights were given to you by your creator, not by your government.
Not true. Every person's right is another person's responsibility.
An anarchy gives no rights to any person (except maybe 'might is right'). Look at the animal world - what rights do animals have? Every right you can think of requires active intervention by a responsible person.
Absolutely. I'm still on Gnome 2, but my plan is to move to MATE. Combined with something like Kupfer - there is little that combines it's productivity and speed.
D
I don't agree - I've been using cinnamon on one of my laptops, and it's just not a replacement for gnome 2. It may be a replacement for those who used gnome 2 on linux mint, but for those who preferred the stock gnome 2 paradigm, MATE is a much better replacement.
Personally I continue to use gnome 2 on ubuntu 10.04 as my main 'get things done' laptop. We have a couple other laptops currently running cinnamon and unity, and were previously running gnome 3, gnome fallback etc... I think I need to give KDE a whirl. But nothing beats gnome 2 for speed and efficiency yet.
My plan is to upgrade to MATE - I think this will be the future of many desktops. But they will need to move up to GTK 3 (if they haven't done already).
D
It also had alt-f9 to minimize, alt-f10 to maximize, alt-f7 to move etc. which is really cool and still found on Gnome2/Mate and Xfce at least.
How did I not know this???!
D
Agreed.
I still mainly shoot film, but I'm quite happy to shoot digital when needed (there's no denying the convenience, ability to work at low and high ISOs, and that the quality is good nowadays, particularly for full frame).
But I prefer the tonal reproduction of film (colour negative still handles highlights better than the top-of-the-range Nikon fullframes, having just recently used the D3 and D4 for a couple of weddings), the existence of only one artefact - which can be quite likeable, and much preferable to digital noise, and the spot-on colour accuracy.
I think the overall look with film is more realistic, objects have more depth. Digital gives a more controlled look, which looks like a painting of the scene. Film looks like the actual scene with a thin film of graininess in front of it.
(the problem is getting it processed and scanned somewhere good that will show the full qualities of the medium)
I feel bad. I don't like the way I look. Thing is though, it really isn't my fault.
Let me respectfully disagree and say that fat reserves can always be decreased by decreasing your calorific intake.
True Multitasking
One small problem:
Define "Health care" as a "right".
Does this "right" include exorbitant measures to extend life?
No. Healthcare is rationed in all current societies. In some societies the decision between whether someone receives treatment or not depends on whether they have insurance or money. In other societies, the decisions are based on other factors.
Would it include plastic surgery (you know, for self-esteem reasons)? Does this "right" diminish with age, since old people getting a scarce resource (e.g. organ transplants) wouldn't see nearly the benefit from it that a younger patient would? I could go on, but you get the point.
These are all questions of health rationing, normally decided by a government organisation (such as NICE in the U.K.) who sit down to thrash out the priorities. Some choices are easy - i.e. $50000 for treatment and ITU care for a 20 year who has had a heart attack due to a congenital heart problem versus $50000 for a series of cosmetic operations. Obviously, there are much harder decisions - but that doesn't mean one shouldn't try to make them, and revert to a system where these decisions are based on the ability to pay.
Obviously there has to be limits on what should go into health care. That said, it's one thing to set those limits impersonally. It's another to see these limits in action when it's your spouse, parent, or child that runs up against them.
Generally children are not ones that are limited against, but yes, if your father is in need of a liver transplant because of alcoholic liver disease, the next organ is more likely going to go to the 25 year old with the autoimmune cirrhosis in need of the liver.
BTW - two things:
1) since when does a right include automatic access to another's labor? Speech, privacy, and all the fun rights listed in the US Constitution don't require another's labor, time, or money.
Really? Freedom of speech requires a fully functioning democratic government that supports freedom of speech - forcibly if necessary, with the full backing of economic stability and peace. Privacy - same again.
Your "right" to health care does. Why is that?
2) If I choose not to exercise an enumerated right (again, c.f. US Constitution), it costs me nothing. If I choose not to exercise this "right" to health care, I still have to pay for it. What the hell?
That is true, but it is unlikely that you will never wish to make use of health care - but I'm guessing you mean that in that scenario you will pay for it yourself. If you are in a position to pay for it yourself, you are likely a high earner. An argument can be made that your wage is dependent on a number of people with a lesser wage to support your position, and it is in your interest that these people are able to receive health care.
as a replacement for Ubuntu 10.04. I want to stick with debian because I get on with apt-get, but I don't want unity/kde/gnome3/cinnamon. Obviously the other alternative is linux mint mate.
D
Money will say more in one moment than the most eloquent lover can in years.
