Because Shiny Things Are Fun - The New New Windows v Linux Thread

Originally Posted by wpeckham Most 'breaking' (what you called hacking) offends me.

Why do you say that hacking into things offends you, and then say that them not letting you do what you want to do with a device (which hacking circumvents) offends you?

If folks didn't tinker with hardware or software, we wouldn't know how far we can extend a hardware or software capabilities.

hack away ya'll

Originally Posted by RedNeck-LQ If folks didn't tinker with hardware or software, we wouldn't know how far we can extend a hardware or software capabilities. hack away ya'll

Exactly. I don't hack to steal games, that's wrong that a lot of people do. I hack to see if I can do something that the machine wasn't made to do or to see how something works. If I bought it, it's mine to do with as I please.

Originally Posted by MTK358 Why do you say that hacking into things offends you, and then say that them not letting you do what you want to do with a device (which hacking circumvents) offends you?

I think he means that the fact it has to be hacked in the first place is what offends him: that the device doesn't automatically let you do anything with it.

Originally Posted by wpeckham Most 'breaking' (what you called hacking) offends me. In the case of appliances such as game systems, disk players, and even my car (Yes, it has a flashable computer or two) I am offended by the presumption that I have no right to reprogram the device just because I OWN it. Whatever the device: if I paid a full price for it and am NOT renting it, I own it and I have a right to modify the way it works. It should be no different than changing the tires on my car: the expense is mine and I can put whatever I afford on there! Sony, Microsoft, and other game system designers would better serve their customers (and their bottom line) to make their systems openly upgradable and locally customizable. They would be fools to not make a way for the machine to be returned to its pristine condition (a reset/reload button), but that whole concept is old tech. Trying to control the people are their customers just pushes those people to purchase other products that are not so restricted. (Or, as in the case above, to perform modifications that the designer never intended.) The automotive industry bothers me even more. The software to run your car would cost about $5 on a CD, perhaps $20 at the garage if made openly available. GM restricts its distribution to dealers only, so that they can charge on the order of $200 to re-flash a module. I am not sure if they all do that, but it makes me long for the 1974 VW bug I used to drive. Nothing on the car could not be services on your driveway; or replaced, repaired, or improved by any corner machine shop. [ I did not even LIKE the car, but I respect that concept a LOT! ]

Sadly, I think the average consumer doesn't care/doesn't think about this- hence the fact that Windows, PS3 and BMWs (and all other modern overly-complex cars) are so popular. Only those of us who are still capable of independent thought seem to care- and we are a small minority. The masses just keep craving the flavor of the month, no matter what it's cost or restrictions on it's owners.

Great analogy about the VW! I just recently bought a 1983 Chevy Chevette [Waits for laughter to subside]- I've never driven a small car in my life...but I love the retro simplicity of this thing....and the fact that it gets 35MPG...... Most people today seem to believe that complexity, high-tech and state of the art is better....even when it's clearly not. The most efficient way to do something- and usually the cheapest and most durable...is usually the SIMPLEST way. (Remember back in the 70's and early 80's there were a plethora of cars around.....simple, unadorned carbureted rear-wheel drive jobs, which got between 40 & 50 MPG.....something which even today's pathetic diminuitive "Smart Car" can't accomplish despite the 100-fold increase in technology.

To be honest, I dislike how companies lock down. But at the same time I love it. For one, I like the challenge of breaking their security, and when I finally do I love how all that money spent by that company for security is then wasted. So please, continue locking us out Sony and Microsoft, because we will always win.

Originally Posted by Sumguy The most efficient way to do something- and usually the cheapest and most durable...is usually the SIMPLEST way.

That's why I like Arch Linux!

Originally Posted by MTK358 That's why I like Arch Linux!

Well, in my opinion if you go too simple you sacrifice ease of use: Newbies who are used to Windows aren't going to want to use a distro that has no GUI.

edit: even though it is possible for me.

Originally Posted by Kenny_Strawn Well, in my opinion if you go too simple you sacrifice ease of use: Newbies who are used to Windows aren't going to want to use a distro that has no GUI. edit: even though it is possible for me.

That was a pretty irrelevant post.

I like things that are simple and I am in control (even if it takes a while to "get" it), and whether the average Windows user can easily use a distro is not a factor when I choose a distro for myself.

Originally Posted by MTK358 That was a pretty irrelevant post. I like things that are simple and I am in control, and whether a newbie can easily use a distro is not a factor when I choose a distro for myself.

I know. And I would be using Arch right now if I didn't have to rebuild the initrd just to get USB support. Nuking USB support *breaks* netbooks!

Originally Posted by Kenny_Strawn Well, in my opinion if you go too simple you sacrifice ease of use: Newbies who are used to Windows aren't going to want to use a distro that has no GUI. edit: even though it is possible for me.

Agreed with MTK358 on this one.

Also, have you seen the Beginner's Guide on the Arch Wiki? It tells you step by step how to set everything up. It is probably one of the most thought-out and well organized piece of documentation available in the Open Source world. If a complete n00b cannot follow that (not because of a hardware problem or a server being down, that's different) then they should never try anything but Ubuntu.

Originally Posted by Kenny_Strawn I know. And I would be using Arch right now if I didn't have to rebuild the initrd just to get USB support. Nuking USB support *breaks* netbooks!

I never remember having to do anything like that and USB worked right away.

Well in my case trying to boot Arch through a USB port at all (be it via a flash drive or via an external CD drive) gives me a ramfs shell.

Originally Posted by Kenny_Strawn Well in my case trying to boot Arch through a USB port at all (be it via a flash drive or via an external CD drive) gives me a ramfs shell.

Seems to me that you are doing something wrong. Works fine here from my flash drive. How did you put it on your flash drive?

Originally Posted by TobiSGD Seems to me that you are doing something wrong. Works fine here from my flash drive. How did you put it on your flash drive?

Even from the Live CD, if it's from a USB port at all (without rebuilding the initrd with the USB hook) it still fails to mount the root FS and drops to a ramfs shell. At least with the 2010.05 build.