On 10/10/10 11:31 PM, Christopher Chan wrote:
>
> /me shrugs. Yeah, maybe I better start saying Illumos and yelling use
> OpenIndiana, a distro which uses Illumos.
It'll only be an option for x86/x86-64 and with the move to using
Fujitsu UltraSPARC chips that contain patented technology which ca
Ben McGinnes wrote:
> On 10/10/10 10:16 PM, Christopher Chan wrote:
>> Go OpenSolaris then. Also OpenOffice and maybe LibreOffice can open docx
>> files...not sure about those from MSO 2010 though...
>
> Except OpenSolaris has already been killed by Oracle. There is a fork
> called Illumos, thou
On 10/10/10 10:16 PM, Christopher Chan wrote:
>
> Go OpenSolaris then. Also OpenOffice and maybe LibreOffice can open docx
> files...not sure about those from MSO 2010 though...
Except OpenSolaris has already been killed by Oracle. There is a fork
called Illumos, though.
Regards,
Ben
signa
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 10/9/10 2:41 PM, John Hinton wrote:
>> Aside from this, Microsoft seems to love to make changes that break
>> other vendor's software. I can't imagine the frustrations they must feel
>> living in this world. WordPerfect, Adobe and just about everyone has had
>> problems due
On 10/9/10 1:33 PM, Bill Campbell wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2010, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On 10/8/10 5:55 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> ...
>>> Y'all may recall a different example: Word Perfect was also once offered
>>> on Linux for about a year, then pulled. OpenOffice wasn't even around
>>> at the ti
On 10/9/10 2:41 PM, John Hinton wrote:
>
> Aside from this, Microsoft seems to love to make changes that break
> other vendor's software. I can't imagine the frustrations they must feel
> living in this world. WordPerfect, Adobe and just about everyone has had
> problems due to some 'upgrade' that
On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Bill Campbell wrote:
> On the other hand, when she wanted to do things with digital photos from
> here camera, she constantly had problems dealing with file transfers using
> a USB flash card reader, mostly properly unmounting and/or finding the
> proper data (she
On 10/9/2010 2:33 PM, Bill Campbell wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2010, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On 10/8/10 5:55 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> ...
>>> Y'all may recall a different example: Word Perfect was also once offered
>>> on Linux for about a year, then pulled. OpenOffice wasn't even around
>>> at th
On Fri, Oct 08, 2010, Les Mikesell wrote:
>On 10/8/10 5:55 PM, Warren Young wrote:
...
>> Y'all may recall a different example: Word Perfect was also once offered
>> on Linux for about a year, then pulled. OpenOffice wasn't even around
>> at the time, so you can't blame competition. Corel had a n
On Sat, Oct 09, 2010, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
...
>I don't believe that profit is the reason why Adobe and others don't offer a
>Linux version of their products. I would rather say it is incompetence to
>maintain the code that is portable across OS's. And that says something about
>the quality of
> I know PPC linux releases could support command-click as right click, so I
> can only assume CentOS 5 could as well. (But I wouldn't know where to
> start looking for this information beyond a naive google search.)
Yes I used to do so on PPC, but I never got it working on the MacBook
Pro + Cent
On Sat, Oct 09, 2010 at 09:24:53AM +0200, Mathieu Baudier wrote:
>
> If you already have the computer, I would recommend you to give a try
> to RHEL 6 Beta 2 and report to Red Hat any problem you have while they
> are still polishing their release.
Ah, wonderful idea! I'm grabbing it now, and wi
On 10/9/10 5:50 AM, Robert Heller wrote:
>
>
> Not a problem. It in fact makes my point: Linux is about *choice*,
> MS-Windows is NOT. Most computer users don't want to take the time and
> effort to make an *intellegent* choice.
But most of the bazillion choices you are forced to make to set up
On 9/10/10 11:12 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
>
> XBox is a gaming console, not an operating system. You cannot install it on a
> generic PC hardware.
>
> Besides, AFAIK XBox's OS was based on WinNT and WinXP, not the 95/98/ME.
It's been quite a few years since I looked at any of this so I might
On 9/10/10 9:06 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
>
> Why is there only one Windows? :-D
>
> (sorry, couldn't resist... ;-) )
There isn't. The original consumer edition (i.e. Win 95/98/ME) became
the XBox.
Regards,
Ben
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_
At Sat, 9 Oct 2010 11:06:20 +0100 CentOS mailing list wrote:
>
> On Saturday, October 09, 2010 01:32:59 Robert Heller wrote:
> > At Fri, 8 Oct 2010 16:50:30 -0400 CentOS mailing list
> wrote:
> > > > Which Linux distro?
> > >
> > > Why is there more than one?
> >
> > Why is there more than o
> ObOnTopic: does anybody know if CentOS supports the MacBookPro7,1 model
> with the funky SATA controller? It's nontrivial to find any hard
> information about even kernel support, much less whether a given distro
> has included any of the relevant patches in its kernel. I don't mind
> OS X, but
> We're just throwing blind assertions at each other, but since I don't
> want to go PC shopping just to pursue the argument, let's keep it
> theoretical. Which do you suppose is a harder task:
Mac laptops have a big problem: they forgot to put the right mouse button...
(and the keyboard layout i
On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 16:25:36 -0600 Warren Young wrote:
>
>But a fair comparison would be the Adobe Creative Suite, since Adobe
>presumably wants their software used everywhere.
>
Er - not when pressured by Micro$oft. Consider Framemaker, which was actively
working on an
OS2 (the IBM operating
On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 06:53:04PM -0700, Benjamin Franz wrote:
>
> Ok. Here is a fairly basic Mac Pro:
[snip]
Why are we talking about this? Isn't this the CentOS mailing list?
ObOnTopic: does anybody know if CentOS supports the MacBookPro7,1 model
with the funky SATA controller? It's nontri
On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 19:21 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 10/8/10 5:55 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> > On 10/8/2010 4:40 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> >> On 10/8/2010 5:25 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> > I think the explanation is different: they tried for a few years to drum
> > up support for FB on Linux,
On 10/08/2010 04:03 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> On 10/8/2010 4:29 PM, Jerry Franz wrote:
>> On 10/08/2010 03:25 PM, Warren Young wrote:
>>> There's more to a PC than [a] spec list.
>> Apple runs commodity hardware that is essentially identical to everyone
>> else's - just priced 3X more.
> ...says
On 10/08/2010 06:25 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> On 10/8/2010 4:09 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> But OS X can legally only run on Apple (tm$$$) systems, where Linux can
>> run on *anything* and anybody's inexpensive hardware.
>
> Apple hardware is fairly priced when compared on quality. Yes, there
At Fri, 8 Oct 2010 16:50:30 -0400 CentOS mailing list wrote:
>
>
> Too long, don't read. It's mostly YMMV (religious) anyways.
>
> > The main thing about Linux that is 'hard' is the fact that
> > you have to use your brain and make choices:
> > Which web browser?
>
> We have this same que
On 10/8/10 5:55 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> On 10/8/2010 4:40 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On 10/8/2010 5:25 PM, Warren Young wrote:
>>>
>>> But a fair comparison would be the Adobe Creative Suite, since Adobe
>>> presumably wants their software used everywhere. You can't blame Adobe
>>> for not porti
On 10/8/2010 4:29 PM, Jerry Franz wrote:
> On 10/08/2010 03:25 PM, Warren Young wrote:
>> There's more to a PC than [a] spec list.
>
> Apple runs commodity hardware that is essentially identical to everyone
> else's - just priced 3X more.
...says the guy comparing machines based only on the spec l
On 10/8/2010 4:40 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 10/8/2010 5:25 PM, Warren Young wrote:
>>
>> But a fair comparison would be the Adobe Creative Suite, since Adobe
>> presumably wants their software used everywhere. You can't blame Adobe
>> for not porting it. They've dipped their toe in the water s
On 10/8/2010 5:25 PM, Warren Young wrote:
>
> But a fair comparison would be the Adobe Creative Suite, since Adobe
> presumably wants their software used everywhere. You can't blame Adobe
> for not porting it. They've dipped their toe in the water several
> times, and shied away each time.
I don
On 10/08/2010 03:25 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> On 10/8/2010 4:09 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
>> But OS X can legally only run on Apple (tm$$$) systems, where Linux can
>> run on *anything* and anybody's inexpensive hardware.
>>
> Apple hardware is fairly priced when compared on quality.
On 10/8/2010 4:09 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> But OS X can legally only run on Apple (tm$$$) systems, where Linux can
> run on *anything* and anybody's inexpensive hardware.
Apple hardware is fairly priced when compared on quality. Yes, there
are cheap POS PCs that compare favorably on feature
On 08/10/10 21:50, Brunner, Brian T. wrote:
>
> Too long, don't read. It's mostly YMMV (religious) anyways.
>
>> The main thing about Linux that is 'hard' is the fact that
>> you have to use your brain and make choices:
>> Which web browser?
>
> We have this same question under Windows. My
Warren Young wrote:
> On 10/8/2010 6:14 AM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
>>> is on Linux servers, but OS X Just Works(tm), and I don't have to be
>>> constantly fiddling to get tools working.
>>
>> I here that occasionally; since you switched to OS X "shortly after it
>> came out", which is like 5 y
On 10/8/2010 6:14 AM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
>> is on Linux servers, but OS X Just Works(tm), and I don't have to be
>> constantly fiddling to get tools working.
>
> I here that occasionally; since you switched to OS X "shortly after it
> came out", which is like 5 years ago now
OS X came out
Too long, don't read. It's mostly YMMV (religious) anyways.
> The main thing about Linux that is 'hard' is the fact that
> you have to use your brain and make choices:
> Which web browser?
We have this same question under Windows. My answer is "all of them,
why not?"
Some of the web sites I
Ben McGinnes wrote:
> On 8/10/10 8:27 AM, Phil Schaffner wrote:
>> About 10% of the people at my workplace use Linux for the
>> desktop despite sizable pressure to the contrary from the CIO.
>
> Is there a reason for the pressure or is it just a generic pro-M$ and
> anti-*nix attitude?
>
>
Or
> Or pulseaudio, which, as has been said, was a solution in search of a
> problem. The latest Fedora thing is systemd, which will help it boot
> faster--of course, once it boots, your scanner still won't work unless
> there's someone your mom can call.
alsa caught up...but whatever
>
> They
On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 10:33 -0700, Bill Campbell wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 07, 2010, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> >Benjamin Franz wrote:
> ...
> >'98. But it's starting to have a visible presence, thanks to Vista.
> > mark "both hands on the gun, point at foot, fire!"
> On the other hand, when I've
Mathieu you make a good point in your email.
People don't want to make a rational choice. I live in Brazil and I was
thinking that in the USA and Europe things would be different. Here in
Brazil we can buy a computer - cheap or not - as they say "configured",
that is: with MS installed and all th
> The main thing about Linux that is 'hard' is the fact that you have to
> use your brain and make choices: Which web browser? Which office suite?
> Which email client? Which desktop? Which Linux distro? For lots of
> people this is way too much work. I guess if these people looked at,
I think th
On 8/10/10 8:27 AM, Phil Schaffner wrote:
>
> About 10% of the people at my workplace use Linux for the
> desktop despite sizable pressure to the contrary from the CIO.
Is there a reason for the pressure or is it just a generic pro-M$ and
anti-*nix attitude?
Regards,
Ben
signature.asc
Descr
Am Thu, 7 Oct 2010 14:20:47 -0400
schrieb Scott Robbins :
> At work, I have a Fedora desktop to keep track of what stupidity will
> happen next with RH/CentOS. (I think that Alan if he's here, will
> attest that it was thanks to this cynicism that the GUI packagekit
> allowing any user to update
> James Bensley wrote on 10/07/2010 01:08 PM:
>> I'm not agreeing with this survey, *but*, there are several times
>> more
>> users already registered here? http://counter.li.org/
>
> I'm not either, but there is a major difference between Linux users
> and
> Linux desktop users.
Agreed. I co
At Thu, 7 Oct 2010 11:54:20 -0700 CentOS mailing list wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 10:33 AM, Bill Campbell wrote:
> :
> >
> > I have gone from OpenDesktop on SCO in the early '90s to Linux from 1996 or
> > so to OS X shortly after it came out. Â The vast majority of my development
> > is o
James Bensley wrote on 10/07/2010 01:08 PM:
> I'm not agreeing with this survey, *but*, there are several times more
> users already registered here? http://counter.li.org/
I'm not either, but there is a major difference between Linux users and
Linux desktop users. I have been both for many year
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 09:16:21PM +0200, Rainer Duffner wrote:
>
> Am 07.10.2010 um 20:54 schrieb Mark:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 10:33 AM, Bill Campbell
> > wrote:
> > :
>
>
> Except for stuff like scanners.
> I doubt my mother would have been able to extract the firmware-binary
> blo
Am 07.10.2010 um 20:54 schrieb Mark:
> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 10:33 AM, Bill Campbell
> wrote:
> :
>>
>> I have gone from OpenDesktop on SCO in the early '90s to Linux from
>> 1996 or
>> so to OS X shortly after it came out. The vast majority of my
>> development
>> is on Linux servers, b
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 10:33 AM, Bill Campbell wrote:
:
>
> I have gone from OpenDesktop on SCO in the early '90s to Linux from 1996 or
> so to OS X shortly after it came out. The vast majority of my development
> is on Linux servers, but OS X Just Works(tm), and I don't have to be
> constantly f
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 01:52:47PM -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
> Of course, mo$t Mac $oftware comes with the Mac, and is all vetted by
> Apple. You might as well say the same for a plain vanilla Windows box.
>
Oh for shame Mark, I expect better from you than the $ stuff. I've
always thoug
At Thu, 7 Oct 2010 13:52:47 -0400 CentOS mailing list wrote:
>
> Bill Campbell wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 07, 2010, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> >>Benjamin Franz wrote:
> > ...
> >>'98. But it's starting to have a visible presence, thanks to Vista.
> >>
> >> mark "both hands on the gun, point at
On 10/7/2010 12:52 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Bill Campbell wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 07, 2010, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>> Benjamin Franz wrote:
>> ...
>>> '98. But it's starting to have a visible presence, thanks to Vista.
>>>
>>>mark "both hands on the gun, point at foot, fire!"
>
>> I h
Bill Campbell wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 07, 2010, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>Benjamin Franz wrote:
> ...
>>'98. But it's starting to have a visible presence, thanks to Vista.
>>
>> mark "both hands on the gun, point at foot, fire!"
> I have gone from OpenDesktop on SCO in the early '90s to Linux f
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>Benjamin Franz wrote:
...
>'98. But it's starting to have a visible presence, thanks to Vista.
>
> mark "both hands on the gun, point at foot, fire!"
On the other hand, when I've attended events for developers such as a Plone
bootcamp and Python
On 10/7/2010 11:36 AM, Benjamin Franz wrote:
> On 10/07/2010 05:05 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
>> You can register on this site if you use linux on your desktop, to
>> prove that we have at least more than 1% market share today :-)
>>
>> http://www.dudalibre.com/gnulinuxcounter?lang=en
>>
>>
> Argh. Thi
On 7 October 2010 13:05, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
> You can register on this site if you use linux on your desktop, to
> prove that we have at least more than 1% market share today :-)
>
> http://www.dudalibre.com/gnulinuxcounter?lang=en
I'm not agreeing with this survey, *but*, there are several times
Benjamin Franz wrote:
> On 10/07/2010 05:05 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
>> You can register on this site if you use linux on your desktop, to
>> prove that we have at least more than 1% market share today :-)
>>
>> http://www.dudalibre.com/gnulinuxcounter?lang=en
>>
>>
> Argh. This is a lousy way to get
On 10/07/2010 05:05 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
> You can register on this site if you use linux on your desktop, to
> prove that we have at least more than 1% market share today :-)
>
> http://www.dudalibre.com/gnulinuxcounter?lang=en
>
>
Argh. This is a lousy way to get that kind of stat. Complete
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Giles Coochey wrote:
> On Thu, October 7, 2010 14:05, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
>> You can register on this site if you use linux on your desktop, to
>> prove that we have at least more than 1% market share today :-)
>>
>> http://www.dudalibre.com/gnulinuxcounter?lang=en
>
On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 14:05 +0200, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
> You can register on this site if you use linux on your desktop, to
> prove that we have at least more than 1% market share today :-)
> http://www.dudalibre.com/gnulinuxcounter?lang=en
Ugh. web-site polls are meaningless, pointless, wrong, an
On Thu, October 7, 2010 14:05, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
> You can register on this site if you use linux on your desktop, to
> prove that we have at least more than 1% market share today :-)
>
> http://www.dudalibre.com/gnulinuxcounter?lang=en
>
>
I don't get it... I use Windows on the desktop and UNIX
You can register on this site if you use linux on your desktop, to
prove that we have at least more than 1% market share today :-)
http://www.dudalibre.com/gnulinuxcounter?lang=en
--
Kind Regards
Rudi Ahlers
SoftDux
Website: http://www.SoftDux.com
Technical Blog: http://Blog.SoftDux.com
Offi
60 matches
Mail list logo
