http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xceiMJSunIg

I'm not sure why they're advertising Linux, tho. Maybe it just never 
actually ran on TV or something. Or is it a HW manufacturer trying to ditch 
the Windows license fees?

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xceiMJSunIg

> I'm not sure why they're advertising Linux, tho. Maybe it just never 
> actually ran on TV or something. Or is it a HW manufacturer trying to ditch 
> the Windows license fees?

  Looked like a rather lame attempt at... something.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 12:26:59 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xceiMJSunIg
> 
> I'm not sure why they're advertising Linux, tho. Maybe it just never
> actually ran on TV or something. Or is it a HW manufacturer trying to
> ditch the Windows license fees?

It's a video from the Linux Foundation's video contest. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Linux... Been there, done that. I used to be such a Linux freak. Until I got a
job. Time became precious, and I didn't feel like configuring my system and
reading Howtos for days and weeks just to get things running. Linux is nice for
building servers for free, but as a desktop system, it sucked penguin balls. And
I'm pretty sure it'll be like that forever.
Cheers,
Burkhard

Post a reply to this message

"moppel" <mop### [at] tutututututude> wrote:
> Linux... Been there, done that. I used to be such a Linux freak. Until I got a
> job. Time became precious, and I didn't feel like configuring my system and
> reading Howtos for days and weeks just to get things running. Linux is nice for
> building servers for free, but as a desktop system, it sucked penguin balls. And
> I'm pretty sure it'll be like that forever.

Yeah. I do have a Linux system - but just as a secondary system to run POV on.
That, and nothing else. Didn't want to throw money at MS for another Windows
license, nor did I want to set up a few "render all this stuff, and I'll see
you later" scripts with Windows stuff. Let alone coming home after work and
finding that the machine has crashed on my 48-hour-render...

So for this purpose, it has proven the right decision. For anything other than
that, I wouldn't want it.

As you say: Time is precious, and I have enough other things to toy around with.

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 22:21:14 -0400, moppel wrote:

> And I'm pretty sure it'll be like that forever.

Maybe you should try a distro that's been developed and released in the 
last 5 years.

Seriously, what you describe reminds me of RedHat in the v6 and v7 days.

I use Linux every day for work and for personal use.  In general, it just 
works - in fact my most recent experiences with Vista have been exercises 
in complete and total frustration.  5 different apps to update software 
from different vendors (including 2 from Microsoft), 6 hours to install 
the updates from the past year and a half, about 10 reboots during that 
entire process, and it's still not updated to current.

Yeah, Vista is a dream.....if you like nightmares.

Comparatively, on my openSUSE 11.0 boxes, I drop to a console and enter:

zypper up -t package

And the system is *current*.

If I wanted to do this from a GUI, I could, but one CLI command does it 
all for me - so why would I want a GUI?  I can type those 20 characters 
and hit enter faster than most could click through the prompts in any OS' 
update application.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> Maybe you should try a distro that's been developed and released in the
> last 5 years.

I'm pretty sure someone experienced with tinkering around with Linux sees these
things differently, and possibly even rightly so.

But what I've seen so far, with a modern distro (Debian Etch... well, Lenny is
out now, but I guess Etch will still qualify as modern), is that it has
improved somewhat, but switching from Windows to Linux is probably still a
full-time job...

> Yeah, Vista is a dream.....if you like nightmares.

.... and so is probably switching from Windows XP to Windows Vista, for that
matter.

> Comparatively, on my openSUSE 11.0 boxes, I drop to a console and enter:
>
> zypper up -t package
>
> And the system is *current*.

Well, that's probably true for all the open source software coming with it, but
suppose you have a few commercial apps? I bet they won't respond to "zypper up
-t package". (And does "zypper up -t package" pull the latest POV beta? I bet
neither ;))

BTW, in XP, to get the OS *itself* up to date, I don't even hit a few keys to
start it. I just klick an "accept" button when it starts automatically.

Post a reply to this message

"moppel" <mop### [at] tutututututude> wrote:
> Linux... Been there, done that. I used to be such a Linux freak. Until I got a
> job. Time became precious, and I didn't feel like configuring my system and
> reading Howtos for days and weeks just to get things running. Linux is nice for
> building servers for free, but as a desktop system, it sucked penguin balls. And
> I'm pretty sure it'll be like that forever.

It's true, and it sounds like you probably have more experience in that
department than I do, but things have improved dramatically since I tried it
just a couple years back.  With Ubuntu, wireless, graphics acceleration, and
sound all worked immediately without a bit of the painful setup I had to go
through the last time.  Might be interesting to check back sometime and see how
things have progressed.

 - Ricky

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 22:21:14 -0400, moppel wrote:
> Seriously, what you describe reminds me of RedHat in the v6 and v7 days.
> ...
> Yeah, Vista is a dream.....if you like nightmares.

You're right, that's a couple of years ago. It was even before Ubuntu. However,
I'm actually happy with Vista. Never had trouble with it. The one thing I still
miss is Linux' shell scripting capabilities. But that's not enough to make want
to spend any effort to get into Linux again. And it's saving so much time when
you have to handle only one OS instead of two.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure that Linux made great progress and that it's
working perfect for you. But I already gave it so many "second chances" back
then. Now I'm using Windows exclusively, and I don't regret it.
Cheers,
Burkhard

Post a reply to this message

moppel <mop### [at] tutututututude> wrote:
> Linux... Been there, done that. I used to be such a Linux freak. Until I got a
> job. Time became precious, and I didn't feel like configuring my system and
> reading Howtos for days and weeks just to get things running. Linux is nice for
> building servers for free, but as a desktop system, it sucked penguin balls. And
> I'm pretty sure it'll be like that forever.

  Nice troll.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

moppel wrote:
> Linux... Been there, done that. I used to be such a Linux freak. Until I got a
> job. Time became precious, and I didn't feel like configuring my system and
> reading Howtos for days and weeks just to get things running. Linux is nice for
> building servers for free, but as a desktop system, it sucked penguin balls. And
> I'm pretty sure it'll be like that forever.
> Cheers,
> Burkhard
> 
> 

That's pretty much the same reason I don't run Windows at home :).

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

moppel wrote:
> 
> You're right, that's a couple of years ago. It was even before Ubuntu. However,
> I'm actually happy with Vista. Never had trouble with it. 

Then I really think you should stick with Vista. It's not that some
system would be perfection and above all others, but they fit to
different uses and different users.

> The one thing I still
> miss is Linux' shell scripting capabilities. 

http://unxutils.sourceforge.net/
http://cygwin.com/

IMO 2 must-haves on Windows-box, at least makes my work a lot easier.

> Cheers,
> Burkhard

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

moppel wrote:
> miss is Linux' shell scripting capabilities.

Windows scripting host.
Or PowerShell, which just hit Windows Update last week. I hear good things 
about it.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message

Eero Ahonen <aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid> wrote:
> moppel wrote:
> > 
> > You're right, that's a couple of years ago. It was even before Ubuntu. However,
> > I'm actually happy with Vista. Never had trouble with it. 

> Then I really think you should stick with Vista. It's not that some
> system would be perfection and above all others, but they fit to
> different uses and different users.

  I find it a bit unselttling how people talk about the two OSes like
they were completely equivalent choices. You either choose one or the
other (or both), like it was just like that.

  People seem to be forgetting one important difference: Windows is a
commercial product, and not even a cheap one. It costs a fair amount of
money. It's definitely *not* a completely equal choice whether you use
Windows or Linux. If you prefer Windows, you'll have to handle a significant
amount of money to get it. (I assume that moppel is using a legit version
of Windows. I can't even begin to express my utter contempt at the hypocrisy
of people who dare to hype some software they are using illegally, without
paying its authors the money they deserve.)

  Not only that, but every new version of Windows has to be bought at full
price (and, as far as I can remember, each new version has been way more
expensive than the previous version). Microsoft (as well as most software
companies) drops support for old versions of their OSes eventually, so if
you want to stick to Windows and get security updates etc, you will be forced
to pay them the money from time to time. This is especially so now that MS
is urging their next version of Windows sooner than anyone expected.

  And it's not only the monetary price you are paying. By using Windows
you are submitting to whatever Microsoft wishes to put in their user
license agreement. For example, Microsoft has not *yet* added strict
DRM restrictions to Windows, but they still have it planned for the
near future. You *will* be forced to submit to the draconian DRM system
if you want to keep your Windows up-to-date to the latest security patches
etc. You will have no choice. (Well, you have a choice: Never update Windows
again, leaving you open to any security holes discovered in the future.)
And DRM is certainly not the only draconian measurement Microsoft has
imposed, and will impose, on its users.

  Linux, being free, and being developer by its users, has a rather different
philosophy. Linux does not drive the interests of companies nor proprietary
technology. Linux drives the interests of its creators: The users themselves.
It just doesn't make sense to impose any draconian limits in Linux, and thus
you don't need to worry about them.

  And of couse with Linux you don't have to pay some company a large amount
of money each other year to keep your system up-to-date.

> > The one thing I still
> > miss is Linux' shell scripting capabilities. 

> http://unxutils.sourceforge.net/
> http://cygwin.com/

> IMO 2 must-haves on Windows-box, at least makes my work a lot easier.

  OTOH, no matter what you do, you will never get the same level of
integration between the system and those tools as in Linux.

  moppel complained about the hassle of always configuring Linux, while
Windows is easy. Rather ironically, once I have had my system running,
I feel the exact opposite: Almost any time I need something new, it's
often a couple of clicks away in Linux, while in Windows it can be a real
hassle, sometimes so much that it's way too much work for me to bother.

  Example: If I need, let's say, the gtkgl development libraries for
some program I making, and they are not in my system, I don't have to
think. I launch "install software", enter "gtkgl" in the search box,
choose the gtkgl-devel package and click "ok". That's it. The libraries
have been installed and I can use them. I don't know where they have been
installed nor do I actually care. It just works.
  I only wish these things were that easy in Windows.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Linux drives the interests of its creators: The users themselves.

And the problem with this philosophy is when you're a user and not a 
creator.  Then you're kind of stuck with whatever a bunch of nerds think is 
easy. :-)

>   OTOH, no matter what you do, you will never get the same level of
> integration between the system and those tools as in Linux.

No, but there are Windows shells that are very well integrated.

>   I only wish these things were that easy in Windows.

If it were, it wouldn't be commercial. :-)

[Note I'm not actually disagreeing with anything you said.]

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > Linux drives the interests of its creators: The users themselves.

> And the problem with this philosophy is when you're a user and not a 
> creator.  Then you're kind of stuck with whatever a bunch of nerds think is 
> easy. :-)

  At least draconian DRM measures are not shoved down your throat because
some multi-billion corporations demand it.

  Even if linux implemented some kind of DRM, you would still have the choice.
I don't believe you will have any choice in Windows.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   At least draconian DRM measures are not shoved down your throat because
> some multi-billion corporations demand it.

True, but not quite what we were talking about.

>   Even if linux implemented some kind of DRM, you would still have the choice.

Actually, Linux folks seem to be the most astute at breaking DRM. :-)

> I don't believe you will have any choice in Windows.

Sure I do. It's open source. It's not like it's harder to break the DRM off 
a DVD in Windows than on Linux, yes? Or any other already-broken DRM?

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 00:23:31 -0400, clipka wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> Maybe you should try a distro that's been developed and released in the
>> last 5 years.
> 
> I'm pretty sure someone experienced with tinkering around with Linux
> sees these things differently, and possibly even rightly so.
> 
> But what I've seen so far, with a modern distro (Debian Etch... well,
> Lenny is out now, but I guess Etch will still qualify as modern), is
> that it has improved somewhat, but switching from Windows to Linux is
> probably still a full-time job...

Nope, not at all.  Depends on what you do, of course, but no, it's not a 
full-time job.

>> Yeah, Vista is a dream.....if you like nightmares.
> 
> .... and so is probably switching from Windows XP to Windows Vista, for
> that matter.

I've got a coworker who gave me her Vista PC and specifically asked that 
Linux be installed on it.  She's in her late 50's and had enough of Vista.

>> Comparatively, on my openSUSE 11.0 boxes, I drop to a console and
>> enter:
>>
>> zypper up -t package
>>
>> And the system is *current*.
> 
> Well, that's probably true for all the open source software coming with
> it, but suppose you have a few commercial apps? I bet they won't respond
> to "zypper up -t package". (And does "zypper up -t package" pull the
> latest POV beta? I bet neither ;))

It would if there was a repository for povray and I was subscribed to 
it. ;-)

> BTW, in XP, to get the OS *itself* up to date, I don't even hit a few
> keys to start it. I just klick an "accept" button when it starts
> automatically.

<shudder>  I never use automatic updates, not even on Linux boxes.  I 
prefer to know what's being installed and in control of when it's being 
installed.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 01:36:49 -0400, moppel wrote:

> Now I'm using Windows exclusively, and I don't regret it.

Well, I've always said that it's generally more important to find 
something that works for you and use that - but that doesn't mean that 
you have to slag off other systems.

Don't think I've seen you around here before, come to that - so as a 
first post (or apparent first post), kinda rubbed me the wrong way.  We 
get enough of that over on the openSUSE forums - so apologies if I seem 
to have "overreacted". :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 12:52:54 -0400, Warp wrote:

>   moppel complained about the hassle of always configuring Linux, while
> Windows is easy. Rather ironically, once I have had my system running, I
> feel the exact opposite: Almost any time I need something new, it's
> often a couple of clicks away in Linux, while in Windows it can be a
> real hassle, sometimes so much that it's way too much work for me to
> bother.

Same here.  :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> 
> Same here.  :-)

Like I said in other post, what he's complaining about is pretty much
the reason I don't use Windows at home (yes, I even have a license for
XP Pro). All that hazzling and tuning and it still doesn't fit me.

> Jim

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 00:23:31 -0400, clipka wrote:
>
> > Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> >> Maybe you should try a distro that's been developed and released in the
> >> last 5 years.
> >
> > I'm pretty sure someone experienced with tinkering around with Linux
> > sees these things differently, and possibly even rightly so.
> >
> > But what I've seen so far, with a modern distro (Debian Etch... well,
> > Lenny is out now, but I guess Etch will still qualify as modern), is
> > that it has improved somewhat, but switching from Windows to Linux is
> > probably still a full-time job...
>
> Nope, not at all.  Depends on what you do, of course, but no, it's not a
> full-time job.

As a side-note, after I bought myself a quad core, I gave my old PC to my
ex-wife.  She's now a proud user of Ubuntu.  No complaints so far.  She surfs
the web, write docs, manages her files, play music and videos, burn lots of
music CDs, changes the appearence of the workspace etc.  I simply don't hear
her saying it sucks or that she can't do any particular thing.  Computer
literacy:  she was a Windows user at work.

Occasionally she asks me to come over to solve some issue, like when she
downloaded some photos from friends and they had been given an automatic name
too big for Gnome's file-manager to deal with:  it simply stopped working and
had to be closed.  My palliative solution:  rename them from the command-line.
My suggestion to her:  give a sensible name when saving to disk.

She's also happy of course to have a personal technician who won't charge a dime
nor reinstall the system every 6 months. ;)

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 08:56:06 -0400, nemesis wrote:

> As a side-note, after I bought myself a quad core, I gave my old PC to
> my ex-wife.  She's now a proud user of Ubuntu.  No complaints so far. 
> She surfs the web, write docs, manages her files, play music and videos,
> burn lots of music CDs, changes the appearence of the workspace etc.  I
> simply don't hear her saying it sucks or that she can't do any
> particular thing. Computer literacy:  she was a Windows user at work.

This is one use case that is pretty typical these days.

> Occasionally she asks me to come over to solve some issue, like when she
> downloaded some photos from friends and they had been given an automatic
> name too big for Gnome's file-manager to deal with:  it simply stopped
> working and had to be closed.  My palliative solution:  rename them from
> the command-line. My suggestion to her:  give a sensible name when
> saving to disk.

That's weird, because I haven't run into a naming issue (length-wise) 
with GNOME at all.  How long are the filenames?

> She's also happy of course to have a personal technician who won't
> charge a dime nor reinstall the system every 6 months.

:-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 11:13:07 +0300, Eero Ahonen wrote:

> Like I said in other post, what he's complaining about is pretty much
> the reason I don't use Windows at home (yes, I even have a license for
> XP Pro). All that hazzling and tuning and it still doesn't fit me.

Yeah, I am licensed for all versions of Windows (I got an MSDN 
subscription through work that I very very occasionally still use) and I 
do have 2K and XP Virtual Machines that I use for a few things that still 
insist on IE or Windows (Siebel and the Blackberry desktop).

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> > Occasionally she asks me to come over to solve some issue, like when she
> > downloaded some photos from friends and they had been given an automatic
> > name too big for Gnome's file-manager to deal with:  it simply stopped
> > working and had to be closed.  My palliative solution:  rename them from
> > the command-line. My suggestion to her:  give a sensible name when
> > saving to disk.
>
> That's weird, because I haven't run into a naming issue (length-wise)
> with GNOME at all.  How long are the filenames?

I may be spelling it wrong, but I think it was something like
AEislkjkakljkasisbrewewolsuidzhoisah7682jhKjhkasjhiosubasaskfhbsaioasoisodnbsUIJjkajssuiIilklslalkjnsaewollAyehjhashsii
wwerYuygvskkjwesq.jpg
or something like that. :)

I don't remember if there were special characters in it, but I was able to use
autocomplete in bash and just mv it to a sane filename.  Gnome file manager
just froze and did not come back.  OTOH, it was a distro from 2007 though I
don't see any particular reason as to why even in 2007 very long names should
pose a problem.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> moppel wrote:
>> miss is Linux' shell scripting capabilities.
> 
> Windows scripting host.
> Or PowerShell, which just hit Windows Update last week. I hear good things
> about it.

Regardless of the shell, there are some things that the OS just makes
harder...

Given a username in the active directory, I challenge you to get his SID, in
human-readable form, using Javascript in Windows Scripting Host.

By "human-readable", I mean the typical format:
S-1-0-00-0000000000-0000000000-0000000000-0000

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Given a username in the active directory, I challenge you to get his SID, in
> human-readable form, using Javascript in Windows Scripting Host.

Is this a start?

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'list.vbs.txt' (2 KB)

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 18:53:57 -0400, nemesis wrote:

> I may be spelling it wrong, but I think it was something like
> 
AEislkjkakljkasisbrewewolsuidzhoisah7682jhKjhkasjhiosubasaskfhbsaioasoisodnbsUIJjkajssuiIilklslalkjnsaewollAyehjhashsii
> wwerYuygvskkjwesq.jpg
> or something like that.
> 
> I don't remember if there were special characters in it, but I was able
> to use autocomplete in bash and just mv it to a sane filename.  Gnome
> file manager just froze and did not come back.  OTOH, it was a distro
> from 2007 though I don't see any particular reason as to why even in
> 2007 very long names should pose a problem.

Yeah, that is weird, definitely shouldn't have been a problem.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>> Given a username in the active directory, I challenge you to get his SID,
>> in human-readable form, using Javascript in Windows Scripting Host.
> 
> Is this a start?

I tried using the Active Directory stuff (never used WMI). Getting the SID
returned a byte array. I found code online to convert that binary array to
the usually-formatted string, but apparently JScript doesn't support COM
byte arrays! (VBScript does)

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> I tried using the Active Directory stuff (never used WMI).

Windows Management Instrumentation. Probably a good thing to peek into. :-)

> Getting the SID returned a byte array. 

I'm pretty sure you just break it up at the proper boundaries. At least, 
that's what I remember. Like taking a byte-array GUID and turning it into 
the usual printable version.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>> Getting the SID returned a byte array.
> 
> I'm pretty sure you just break it up at the proper boundaries. At least,
> that's what I remember. Like taking a byte-array GUID and turning it into
> the usual printable version.

Yes, it's just that little issue that, from JScript, I couldn't get to the
bytes in the array at all >.<

Post a reply to this message