You're just pairing them wrong.
You're just pairing them wrong.
I am not. This is an update for the most widely used OS in the world which reboots when one of the most popular consumer devices available is plugged in. How exactly should it not be a story?
We'll run a story when your iPhone reboots every time you plug in a headset.
Yeah, but now you cannot advertise how thin your fancy new phone is. It always surprised me how that is supposed to be important.
Remember, iPhones are not so much phones but fashion statements.
So, the question seems to come down to whether Wayland can do remote apps as effectively as X can, either by itself or by way of some kind of extension. I've read the entire thread so far, and no answer, not even a theoretical one.
The thing is, X cannot even do remote effectively anymore - at least not with modern DEs/WMs. We're way past the days of rendering with geometrical primitives.
"The purpose of the keygen tool is to generate a 16-byte random number for use by the other tools. This simple task can be accomplished by reading 16 bytes from
No, not really - not if you want to maximize entropy. The procedure he describes afterwards seems awfully convoluted, but might be a good way of generating strong pseudorandom numbers in systems with a poor
Gnome 3 (pffft!) user here. I've been using Wayland by default with it for almost a year one... with zero issues. And i do mean zero. It runs better and using less resources than X.org ever did.
You might whine about Fedora all you want, but the switch makes a lot of sense for non-remote *nix desktop users. Which i'd venture to say it's pretty much all of their user base nowadays.
Nit: "Debian", not "Ubuntu".
When did the package manager become more important than the operating environment? Is this a side effect of home screen app store mentality?
I guess it's because back in the day pretty much every usable distro was either based on RedHat or Ubuntu. The lone exception was Slackware, IIRC.
This- there's a shitload of distros out there not using apt nor rpm.
Me? I run Arch on all my home systems.
Just asked the exact same question below. I really tried to like it (even back in 1997-98) based on reviews and comments from people who loved the game, and and always found it a poor FPS overall.
Not meaning to troll, but i tried to play Goldeneye back in its day and again recently, and i can't just understand why it is so revered. It is because it was one of the first decent FPS for consoles?
My main peeve is that it always felt so slow. Remember, this came out the same year that Quake II was released.
No idea to be honest, but my desktop feels way more snappier than before, plus power usage has gone down - it runs cooler and the battery lasts longer.
My main computer is an Intel Skylake laptop and 4.7 does seem to run much better on it than its predecessor. Wuv me some Arch.
...i honestly couldn't care less. This is just another nail in the coffin; good riddance.
Opera died when, for some unfathomable reason, they decided to rewrite their browser as a Chromium skin. The original Opera browser was a fantastic product.
Nowadays i use Chromium myself while i eagerly wait for the first stable release of Vivaldi.
The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the pavement is precisely 1 bananosecond.