Arariel wrote:yum repolist is certainly easier and more intuitive than knowing where my config files are.
Eh, I'm not so sure. /etc/apt is an easy guess, and from there you just need tab completion. At least without quite fancy tab completion (which I don't have enabled on all of my systems and I think I actually don't even really like when it is), you can't even use tab completion to help with yours.
What do you mean by discoverable? It's in the man pages, isn't it?
I mean "you can discover by looking at and playing with the program." I'm sure I found the left/right control, but maybe not up/down or pgup/pgdown. I did discover that the scroll wheel seems to seek through the song IIRC.
Most file managers allow you to change the default program to open a file by opening a new terminal with the program. So you can change mp3s to open mplayer, or plaintexts to open vim.
That's different from having a playlist that you can populate via an open dialog.
There's probably a way to say "mplayer, if there's no mplayer process already running then start one and play this file, otherwise enque this file in the playlist of the existing process", but the man page is 154 pages and I'm not about to go read it. It's possible than --enqueue does that, but the description in the manpage certainly doesn't say so and I'm in Windows now so can't test. I'll just take a media player that I can, you know, hit ctrl-o and then pick the files I want.
As in, Microsoft couldn't/wouldn't allow it to be removed. Apparently removing IE could break stuff.
While I've never tried it, my impression is you can remove IE proper; this may be true in XP as well. You probably can't remove the Trident engine though, because that is (entirely reasonably) used in other parts of the system.
I've fucking done it. Get over the "Embedded" name. Here's what Wikipedia says about Windows Embedded Standard: "Windows Embedded Standard (2009) is the updated version of Windows XP Embedded, the fully componentized version of Windows XP Professional and the successor to Windows NT 4.0 Embedded. It provides the full Win32 API and is available for x86 processors."
I'm making a point about terminology: GNU is a bunch of tools and utilities, and Linux is a kernel. Nothing more than that. You can say the vast majority GNU/Linux distros are affected by a CUPS vulnerability, but you can't say CUPS itself is a GNU/Linux vulnerability.
Yes, but that's just arguing naming. To most users, the fact that CUPS isn't part of GNU/Linux in the strictest sense is irrelevant. It's basically system-level software that is as much or more a part of the system than, say, Bash. And if you want to go down that road, you could argue that "Windows is way more featureful than GNU/Linux so it's unsurprising that it has more vulnerabilities because it has a bigger attack surface" and be basically completely grounded. I mean, I'd argue that if you want to go down that road, GNU/Linux doesn't even have a GUI! So how's that supposed to be usable by your typical user?
You also get a much faster drive. Granted, it's a tradeoff, but don't act like the Macbook Pro's drive is unquestionably better.
MacBook Pro gets the same drive as the Dell. MacBook Air OTOH has flash storage, but only 64 GB for the cheapest at $1000.
Sorry, I meant to say the Air's, as in the Air's drive is by no means unquestionably inferion.
In my experience Dell's build quality is not very good. Of course it's cheaper.
I've had fairly good experience with them. But this Lenovo at $540 is even better (subtract $100-200 for Windows refund):
Up to 3rd Gen Intel® Core™ i7-3612QM processor
Intel® HD graphics
Up to 8GB DDR3 memory
Up to 750GB hard drive
14.0" HD LED widescreen display[/quote]
Care to link to the one you quoted? Because I did a Lenovo comparison and came out with a margin that was rather smaller. But I went with a 12.5" Lenovo vs the 13" Macbook Pro. (That's about what I have now and I'm basically certain I like it more than I would a larger version.)
Copper Bezel wrote:I mean that when Apple does things, other companies take them as things worth doing, and the ultrabook class exists to compete with the Air; it wouldn't exist and be defined the way it is if not for the Air.
I'm not convinced that's the case. For instance, I see the Air as being heavily influenced* by netbooks, and the Asus Eeee's availability predated the Air's announcement by months. I'm not going to say the PC manufacturers didn't respond to the Air, but it's entirely possible that they would have gotten there anyway.
* Actually I think the time gap is probably too small to have been Apple pulling the me-too trick; more like both developments happened at similar times. But my point remains: ultrabooks have a ton in common with netbooks, and that lineage isn't from Apple's influence.
EvanED wrote:(My typical -- and admittedly, best -- example of this is transactional NTFS.) It's some of the userland UI problems where Windows really starts to break down.
Well that's getting into file systems, not kernels, and I suppose I could sing the praises of Btrfs in contrast, but I think that is too nerdy even for this forum.
I don't want to dis Btrfs too much (though I will happily trash their xattr support if you'd like :-p) because I'm really happy to see some of its features gaining use, but I don't view it as being very innovative. ZFS is what you'd really want to point at to argue my assertion, and from a systems-agnostic point of view I still view it as a better file system than Btrfs.
Copper Bezel wrote:The one difference from Windows that struck me from my first try at Ubuntu, and that still I can't get over, is that bit where the Windows UI stops responding because a particular application is busy.
The whose-a-whats now? I'll be honest: that never happens to me, with the exception of when the system starts thrashing (when it does start behaving far worse than Linux; I have revived a heavily-paging Linux system a few times, but on Windows I usually just give up. Fortunately, this almost never happens anyway).
So yeah, when I think of things I don't want to put up with in Windows, they're comfortably in the "userland problems" category, and what filesystem or whatnot is involved underneath doesn't really come to mind.
I'll agree that it doesn't have much of a user-visible effect. It's more a comment on the internals. For instance, it really hurts when I see someone say that MS should pull an Apple and replace the NT kernel with BSD. It's the NT kernel that's in some ways the best part of Windows (though not without many faults) and in many ways technically superior to Unices. furthermore, everyone always complains (very legitimately, I'll add) about the Windows monoculture when it comes to viruses and such -- but I think equally as dangerous is what I might call the "Unix monoculture" in terms of ideas of how OSs and system software should work and be built. Since such a huge percentage of CS people become fans of Unices, it can be hard to break the orthodoxy (especially in cases where breaking the orthodoxy requires, say, contravening POSIX -- e.g. in the case of a wicked awesome Reiser4 feature being a contributor to why Reiser4 wasn't accepted to the Linux kernel). Between things like transactional NTFS and PowerShell, I actually view MS as being the biggest innovator at the moment in commercial system software outside the world of the GUI shell.
(Rob Pike has a good talk
where he discusses the Unix orthodoxy somewhat (unfortunately I've only been able to find notes, but they do somewhat stand on their own). His notes didn't convince me or tell me there's a problem, but they did help a lot with my ability to articulate it.)