Ursus Pacificus

Originally posted 8/27/07 on technotrike.blogspot.com –ed.

I can’t say this surprises me

The gist of it is that users of Microsoft’s “next generation” operating system Windows Vista… Oh, and this image from the Vista home page is pretty funny… standard marketing ploy…

Screen shot of funny Vista ad.

Why is this funny? Heh… Ever seen Tron? At the end the Master Control Program (MCP) was revealed to have been nothing more than a chess program gone mad… Heh… This might be a little esoteric for you… who am I kidding?! If you’re reading this blog, you love esoteric! Looks for just a second at the computer and monitor behind the kid. Now I don’t know when Compaq STOPPED selling that case style, but I remember buying them when I worked at Sony IN THE LAST CENTURY… and the Sony shop I worked at did warranty service on Sony computer monitors (both Sony-branded and OEM units)… the last of that model of monitor were dropping out of their THREE YEAR warranty in 1997… something tells me the computer and monitor pictured have no capacity to run Windows Vista… Can anyone remember the little “Simulated reception” disclaimer on print advertisements for TVs?

OK… so the problem is that Audio Playback on Vista is pre-empting the ability to receive data of the network. So… Does that mean that if you’re streaming multimedia content, um… your inbound network performance goes out the window? Yes it does. Ah, sweet irony. Eight years ago, I had a Linux machine that couldn’t even run a GUI with respectable performance (486DX2-100 w/ 16MB RAM), but could stream oggs and MP3s. With Vista, You really need 1GB of RAM just to boot the stupid thing… they recommend a dual-core processor and 2GB of RAM… and there’s not enough spare clock ticks and memory bandwidth to run the network card and the sound card at the same time.

That’s flat-out pathetic.

So… I still am not going to get MS Windows Vista. Just for the record. I just got a chuckle out the whole thing.

Originally posted 5/25/07 on technotrike.blogspot.com –ed.

Buy one. Soon. I’m going to.

here’s where the computers are today

…but the official site that’s being published is http://dell.com/linux, which, if you ask me is a little convoluted.

Anyway… Buy one… or two if you can

Whee!

Originally posted 5/14/07 on technotrike.blogspot.com –ed.

“…freedom from the tyranny of overlighting”?! Idiot.

This is quite possibly the most asinine technology article I think I’ve ever read.
Mike Elgan, the author of this useless rant, kinda reminds of of Ol’ Jerry Taylor from Tuttle, OK… I mean… Is this guy serious?!

Firstly, while decorative lights are irritating, most lights on techno-gear for adults are NOT superfluous. They serve a diagnostic function and, more often than not, can save precious minutes (or hours) in troubleshooting a problem.

Secondly, If you have a switch, or router (or similar device) you should be interested in whether or not it’s working. The indication of whether it’s working comes in the form of blinkenlights. Would you prefer a sound? How about a smell? If you’re not interested in whether it’s working, you should discard it. Blinkenlights are the simplest, cheapest and most effective way to indicate changes of state and steady conditions. I suppose manufacturers could put a big “ON/OFF/MOMENTARY-ON” toggle switch tied to the ground bus for all the LEDs… that way you could have them on all the time, off all the time, or on only to check things. Short of this (and bear in mind that the switch will add a few bucks to each device, as well as one more thing to break), cope.

Thirdly, it’s people like this dude who demand more bloat from hardware and software manufacturers. You could have something simple and ugly that works constantly for 25 years, or your could have something pretty and fragile that might last through the waranty period. For every dimmer circuit or extra bit of firmware to change the behavior of the lights your adding a place where something could be screwed up.

The bottom line is this: If you don’t like blinkenlights in your bedroom don’t put any there. I fail to comprehend why this idea escapes a the grasp of someone like Mr. Elgan.

Originally posted 4/17/07 on technotrike.blogspot.com –ed.

I don’t quite know exactly what’s going on here, but Microsoft seems to have forgotten there’s a “rest of the world” out there (such as Firefox on Linux)….

This image is a screen shot I took Tue, April 17, 2007 at about 8:30 in the morning, as I was searching for bios on Gates and Ballmer.

As an added haha-hoho, check this out:

So… D’ya think ol’ Bill was using “styling products” in his hair, or… “rolling his own”?

Of course, now, he takes his hygiene more seriously, but… What’s with the vase full of dowels and smudged plasma TV in the background?

Originally posted 4/17/07 on technotrike.blogspot.com –ed.

This article is telling.

The “mainstream” IT press has been saying that Linux is not ready for prime-time since 1992.

As some are aware, it’s not just what you say, but also what you don’t say, that says a lot.

In this article’s 20 most annoying products, notice:

• 5 MS Windows releases or components thereof

• 11 (or so) add-on software products exclusively for Microsoft Windows (4 (or so) published my Microsoft)
• 3 Apple products

There is not a single Linux distribution on this list. There is not evidence on this list of annoynaces that Linux even exists. Linux clearly exists. I’m writing this blog post on FedoraCore 5 Linux. Could it be that no one else uses Linux? Well… Not especially likely, given that everyone in the office where I work uses at least one copy on their desktops… and I have 10 machines at home, all running various flavors of Linux. Then there’s servers… At work, we have 20 or so servers running Debian Etch. Another 30 or so running on VMware Server. So… I’m regularly in contact with somewhere around 70 Linux boxes, all purchased with no OS or with Linux installed after-market. Now, admittedly, I can’t be typical of ordinary Linux users, but I’ll bet for every machine sold with Linux pre-installed by the manufacturer (which actually show up in sales figures) there are hundreds, perhaps thousands… maybe, just maybe, tens of thousands… of machines out there running Linux as a replacement for “some other pre-installed Operating System” or installed directly on machines assembled “a la carte”. Because of this “hard numbers” for market share are hard to come by.

This anemic (or concise) blog post from 2005 predicted that Linux’s Desktop marketshare for Servers would be 33% this year, and Desktops would be up to 6% by next year. This is based on sales of systems with Linux pre-installed. So if your machine came wiht MS Windows pre-installed and you stripped that off and installed Linux, it still counts as Windows market share, because market share counts sales. If you built a machine from new parts with no OS, and installed Linux (assuming that, like most people, you downloaded a Linux ISO image for free (which is perfectly legal if so licensed) and installed it, that, also, does not count as a “sale” and, therefore, does not show up in marketshare figures.

Further, in my experience, the hardware replacement cycle seems to be slower for Linux users than for users of other Operating Systems. I have a couple machines in my personal fleet that are over 10 years old, which I purchased new and are still doing valuable work. One (among other activities) serves my personal website. I also have newer machines, doing heavier lifting, like video editing and multi-track recording.

The point of all this is that the installed base of Linux systems is probably significantly larger than the “market share” numbers might lead you to believe. With that in mind, I think it’s interesting that, among PC World’s readership, there were no statistically significant complaints about Linux. It’s certainly not the case that PC World denies the existence of Linux. A cursory search shows they report (or at least redistribute) stories on Linux and related issues. Could it be that PC World’s readership is Linux-ignorant? Not likely.

Now, I don’t mean to suggest that Linux is free of annoyances. It’s a product of human effort and human minds. Complaints from MS Windows apologists I hear about Linux are things like:

1. I shouldn’t have to edit xorg.conf (or any other config file) by hand.

2. There’s no good software for Linux.
3. I don’t have time (or interest or need) to learn a whole new Operating System.
4. It’s too much like DOS.

…To which I usually respond:

1. In most situations and with most modern distros, you don’t have to, but it’s nice to be able to if you need to.

2. What? Like Sasser, LuvBug, Gator, BonziBuddy, MS Bob and SoftRAM? I have a perfectly serviceable office suite, web browser, email client, IM client, games, media players, remote access software, image manipulation software, PDF generator and so on, which I am allowed to use and redistribute at no charge in perpetuity. Would you like a copy?
3. What’s to learn? There’s one big filesystem instead of all your little drives. Slash instead of backslash. Case sensitive. The rest you can pick up painlessly as you go.
4. Oh, you mean with the GUI and the windows and buttons and the mouse and stuff? Yeah, I see what you mean. You sound like the way Mac people used to bitch about MS Windows, until THEY got a Unix command line, too, and started running on Intel chips

Linux adoption seems to continue. While “Sales” of desktop systems with Linux pre-installed are still very slow, this can be be attributed, at least in part, to Microsoft’s oppressive OEM licensing contracts forcing most large (non-Apple) OEMs to offer nothing but MS Windows to the general public.

Yet, in spite of all the bitching about Linux that non-Linux people seem to do when they talk to me, when asked by their own group what annoys them most, Microsoft and its illegitemate progeny seem to take the cake.

Good work, Steve. Congratulations, Bill.

Originally posted 2/22/07 on technotrike.blogspot.com –ed.

This article tellsof Microsoft’s prohibition on virtualization. Now, I’m not exactly sure what this prohibition amounts to… I mean whether there is any actual detection of virtualized hardware, resulting in crippled if any operation… or if it’s just something more… shitty…

I mean, there are a few users in my workplace who need Windows VMs (we run VMWare Server extensively)… do I have to … I don’t know… take it up the ass a little more from Microsoft? To I have to pay extra money to this ridiculous company to be able to use their products.

I am so (and I appologize for the potty mouth… I’ve had a couple beers… not that it’s an excuse… my inhibitions are down. Cope.) fucking disgusted with Microsoft. Here’s a DIGITIAL company operating like it was a CAR COMPANY. I don’t give a flying fuck how much MS payed to DEVELOP Vista. Their per-unit manufacturing and distribution costs are nearly zero. A company that charges $400 a copy for software it expects to sell tens of millions of copies of is just pure unadulterated greed. This, especially coming from a company which can absorb a billion and a half Dollar settlement like a T-1000 can absorb a BB (any doubts? As of 21:53:20 EST 22 Feb 2007 Yahoo Financials shows Microsoft with a Market Capitalization of $287 Billion, while a more traditional giant company like, say, GM has a Market Cap of just under $20 Billion. What’s the difference? It takes GM years and tens or hundreds of millions of Dollars to develop a new model, just like Microsoft, but GM’s manufacturing and distribution costs are way WAY WAY higher, to say nothing of legacy pension and healthcare costs.

…and … AND… nevermind how protective Microsoft is of its new baby… Steve Ballmer and company have created a remarkable turd. A co-worker of mine purchased a Vista-installed Dell computer and experienced at least 2 Blue Screens of Death before she could even log in and do anything useful!

Yet again, from he sidelines, this is all, in a macabre sort of way, funny. Remember, I thought Dr. Strangelove was funny.

Originally posted 1/30/07 on technotrike.blogspot.com –ed.

This article really comes as no surprise.

Rather than making Vista revolutionary… by, say, eliminating the need for anti-malware software, Microsoft has added its own anti-malware-ware. Sigh.

Rather than providing its users with a powerful and fast CLI, Microsoft has opted to add still more bloat in the form of Vista’s new “Aero” UI.

Parental controls. Uh. One more place where parents choose to abdicate the responsibility for raising their kids.

I’m not impressed. Apparently, I’m not the only one. This article and these comments suggest that a large segment of the population is … unmoved.

The “meh” began today.

Originally posted 1/26/07 on technotrike.blogspot.com –ed.

This is ridiculous
This scratches the surface
…and this is just plain scary

Now, as you may be aware, I’m not planning to jump on the Vista bandwagon. I’m just gonna step gingerly out of the way and let it roll off the cliff.

I’m not going to say you gotta use Linux. I AM gonna say, “You gotta dump Microsoft!”

You’re an adult… you can do what you think is right, but I am not going to listen when all the remorseful pro-Vista folks drop to their knees, thrust their gaze skyward and scream, “Whyyyyyyyyyyyyy?!”

If you choose it, you deserve what you get.

Originally posted 10/18/06 on technotrike.blogspot.com –ed.

Let me get this straight…. This article states that Microsoft will be “giving away” it software to allow multiple operating systems to run on a single computer. Swell.

VMware did that 6 months ago with it’s VMWare Server product, free to any and all. I use it all over the place. I run my private streaming radio station on it. I use it at work and at home. The extra benefit for me is that a VMWare VM will run on an MS Windows box OR a Linux box. I don’t know for sure, but I’d bet my fertility that MS will only release a version to run on MS Windows.

This is the browser war for the new century. Xen is Open Source, VMWare Server is free (as in beer)… there’s Bochs and Qemu, both freely available hardware emulators… Why go with MS? Because it’s free (as in beer), now? Eh. I really don’t think Microsoft has anything compelling to offer here. Then again, I’ve never really thought Microsoft has had anything compelling to offer. In the last browser war (The Browser War), MS couldn’t undercut Netscape on the browser side, in terms of price, so it went with a preadatory strategy of “incorporating” their browser into their operating system, such that it could not be removed. Thus, even if a user went through the trouble of installing Netscape’s browser, selecting it as the default and using it, that user was still subject to all the flaws, security vulnerabilities, and usability issues of IE. Thus, Netscape, essentially, died. Their web server was not compelling, because there was Apache, and their browser was not compelling because IE was ubiquitous and inescapable.

This will be a little different, methinks. It will be some time before virtualization really gains traction in the comsumer market. Further, as MS continues to bulk-up its operating systems, hardware improvements will continue to be mooted by MS bloat, thus making virtualization just as pointless on an MS system 5 years from now as it is today. Besides… until MS makes a publicly acknowledged effort to be OS-agnostic in its virtualization offering, I don’t know that many high-brow IT types are going to embrace it any more than they already do (except, of course, the ones who’ve already drunk the Kool-Aid)

And there’s another wrinkle, here, which may escape the note of those who can’t see the IT forest for the MS trees. Virtualization is not really simple to grasp.. Microsoft has spent the last 25 years dumbing-down its userbase. Now, they’re going to spring THIS on them? Tee, hee. This’ll be fun to watch.

I’m glad I get to watch this from the sidelines. I can chuckle and point, and I do.

Originally posted 9/7/06 on technotrike.blogspot.com –ed.

This “opinion piece” illustrates precisely why I hate working for, with or around “suits”.

He makes 2 basic points: 1) The image of Linux is too frivolous, and 2) The names of Linux programs and utilities are not “intuitive” and “the meaning is lost on all but hard-core Linux folks”

Lose the penguin?! Is he kidding?!?! “The Pengin” (His name is “Tux”, damnit!) is cool. Tux is friendly. Tux is non-threatening. Tux is happy. I suppose being cool, friendly, non-threatening and happy is not welcome in the business world. Linux needs to be less frivolous, I suppose. Is an abstract piece of fruit with a bite missing too frivolous a logo? How about the word “Linux” written cryptically to form a square tipped on one of its vertices? Is that boring enough? Maybe just the word “Linux” all crammed together… Yeah… that would be a nice boring logo.

Bad names? YaST and GIMP are “bad” names? How is “PowerPoint” intuitive? In what way does “Excel” imply spreadsheety goodness? “Access” is a database? “Distiller”… now THAT’s an intuitive name for a program… Obviously, it removes any reference to Ben or Jerry Stiller from your documents. Jackass. The only reason people know that Excel is a spreadsheet is because it has been the de facto standard spreadsheet for 10 years. It has been, effectively, the only option out there (yes, I know about OpenOffice.org, but most common MS Windows users don’t). The other problem with using “boring but descriptive” names for programs is that there are often several, dozens, or even hundreds of programs out there in the Linux world for any one purpose. To call a program “System Manager” is stupid because it becomes impossible to distinguish one System Manager from another. Also, it seems like Mr. Ohlhorst has not taken a recent look at “modern” Linux distributuions. If you go into the “Applications” menu on a typical FedoraCore box these days, you’ll see, under “Office”, programs named “Presentaion”, “Spreadsheet” and “Word Processor”. How is that counterintuitive?! Further, it appears the author of TFA likes the way Microsoft names things. Of course, when Microsoft decides on a clever name for one of its products (like Windows, Word, Update, et cetera), it frequently takes that name as a Registered Trademark. So… How are the F/OSS folks supposed to cope with that? When words like Office, Windows, Word and so on are trademarks (the USPTO is really asleep at the switch, here) developers of and/or for other platforms are forced to use names which are unique, non-infringing and, at least in some way, suggestive of the function of the program.

I say leave Linux just the way it is… I mean, keep improving functionality, stability, usability, security and so on, but leave Tux right where he is. Don’t futz with the application names. If the mascot and the program names are keeping Mr. Ohlhorst off linux, maybe it’s for the best… I mean… would you want to support a guy with a worldview like his? I wouldn’t.