Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 5th Jul 2008 22:07 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu As the Ubuntu Intrepid Ibex (8.10) development gets going, many people will probably be wondering what new end-user features they can expect. This article lists the top 5 new features. My Take: Nothing really exciting. I still shiver over the inability of the default Totem installation not de-interlacing my camcomder-derived home videos and DVDs because GStreamer doesn't support it, or no full A/V support on Pidgin yet, or something as simple as this which I've been asking for years now and it would probably take 5 minutes to implement.
Order by: Score:
5 minutes?
by siride on Sat 5th Jul 2008 23:09 UTC
siride
Member since:
2006-01-02

It really does seem simple, so perhaps you should submit your own patch?

Reply Score: 10

RE: 5 minutes?
by Eugenia on Sat 5th Jul 2008 23:11 UTC in reply to "5 minutes?"
Eugenia Member since:
2005-06-28

It's been years since I used GTK+ and the Gnome API, so it won't be 5 minutes for me. It will be 5 hours. It's 5 minutes for the guy who owns the app though.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: 5 minutes?
by g2devi on Sat 5th Jul 2008 23:54 UTC in reply to "RE: 5 minutes?"
g2devi Member since:
2005-07-09

The change seems simple, but the last comment reveals a bigger issue. In order to implement your good change, GNOME would need to create a new theme element. You can't just hard-code the background as grey since if you use a theme with grey letters, nothing will be readable.

That being said, there is another approach -- reuse existing themed elements. For instance, turn each section into into a tab:

-------------
Section 1 |
-----------------------------------------------
Items in section 1

-------------
Section 2 |
-----------------------------------------------
Items in section 2

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: 5 minutes?
by evangs on Sun 6th Jul 2008 06:41 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: 5 minutes?"
evangs Member since:
2005-07-07

The change seems simple, but the last comment reveals a bigger issue. In order to implement your good change, GNOME would need to create a new theme element. You can't just hard-code the background as grey since if you use a theme with grey letters, nothing will be readable.


At the moment, that page looks like it's just a huge custom control that draws bold text for the sections and then draws the section links and you can click on.

Drawing the darkened banner on the back is not that hard, even if you are worried about the usability repercussions. There must be the GTK equivalent to the Win32 function GetSysColor which allows you to retrieve the various colors associated with the current theme. One possibility in this scenario is to make the background of the banner use the color of controls (like buttons) and have the text colored the same as the theme's text color.

That way, if you can read the text on a pushbutton on a particular theme, you should have no issues with the banner. If you can't read the text, you're probably going to have issues reading text on controls anyway so go shoot your theme designer.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: 5 minutes?
by haydenm on Sun 6th Jul 2008 08:31 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: 5 minutes?"
haydenm Member since:
2006-10-29

That makes no sense what-so-ever.

I don't see why it needs to be a theme colour, there is a very simple solution for it, just have a semi-transparent gray overlay when the background is light and semi-transparent white overlay when the background is dark.

This is a simple solution that will work with any theme, probably not 5 minutes but I doubt it would be an hours work.

Stop making excuses, the developer is obviously lazy ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: 5 minutes?
by OddFox on Sun 6th Jul 2008 08:36 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: 5 minutes?"
OddFox Member since:
2005-10-05

Sounds awesome, get coding since you seem to have it all figured out already!

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: 5 minutes?
by haydenm on Sun 6th Jul 2008 08:42 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: 5 minutes?"
haydenm Member since:
2006-10-29

Sounds awesome, get coding since you seem to have it all figured out already!


I didn't say *I* wasn't lazy ;)

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: 5 minutes?
by fernandotcl on Sun 6th Jul 2008 21:45 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: 5 minutes?"
fernandotcl Member since:
2007-08-12

That makes no sense what-so-ever. I don't see why it needs to be a theme colour, there is a very simple solution for it, just have a semi-transparent gray overlay when the background is light and semi-transparent white overlay when the background is dark. This is a simple solution that will work with any theme, probably not 5 minutes but I doubt it would be an hours work. Stop making excuses, the developer is obviously lazy ;)

I hope that was supposed to be a joke? Either that or you have no idea about what you're talking about.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: 5 minutes?
by haydenm on Tue 8th Jul 2008 02:10 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: 5 minutes?"
haydenm Member since:
2006-10-29

I hope that was supposed to be a joke? Either that or you have no idea about what you're talking about.


Is that supposed to be a troll post? You give no argument at all, are you kidding me?

It's not hard to calculate the brightness of a colour and I assume GTK has some sort of alpha-blending capabilities for canvas/graphics context/whatever they call it (even if it hasn't; a function can be implemented within 20 lines of code).

Next time it would be nice to have a little more insight into why you "think" something is not feasible.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: 5 minutes?
by vinkelhake on Sun 6th Jul 2008 00:00 UTC in reply to "RE: 5 minutes?"
vinkelhake Member since:
2005-12-16

Five hours seems like a tiny investment for something that you have apparently been harassing the gnome developers about for over a year :-)

Reply Score: 19

v RE[3]: 5 minutes?
by Eugenia on Sun 6th Jul 2008 00:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: 5 minutes?"
RE[4]: 5 minutes?
by VistaUser on Sun 6th Jul 2008 00:07 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: 5 minutes?"
VistaUser Member since:
2008-03-08

Would be just as easy to not have a good moan about it too. (or maybe they might, just might accept a patch. You won't know unless you try it.)

Am I right in thinking that the original dig was slightly trollish?

Reply Score: 8

RE[5]: 5 minutes?
by ralph on Sun 6th Jul 2008 00:09 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: 5 minutes?"
ralph Member since:
2005-07-10

No, you're wrong. I wasn't slightly trollish, it was big time trollish.

But then again, anyone who's been around this site for some time wouldn't expect anything less from Eugenia.

Reply Score: 13

RE[4]: 5 minutes?
by kensai on Sun 6th Jul 2008 03:44 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: 5 minutes?"
kensai Member since:
2005-12-27

Yeah, typical answer of a person that does not want to provide a patch or any help, say it is not going to happen, even though they don't know if it is going to. Please, next time, file a bug report and submit a patch if you can. People just sit there waiting for developers to do everything, there is one simple factor, open source developers are most of the time voluntary workers. Windows is hacked on by a lot of people that get paid a lot of money, yet they need vendors to make drivers for them. And they make an OS that doesn't just cut it for me and is too buggy.

But well, people are being infected by the Linux haters blog syndrome, a person that does not contribute and just whines, how mature of him.

Edited 2008-07-06 04:03 UTC

Reply Score: 9

RE[4]: 5 minutes?
by StephenBeDoper on Sun 6th Jul 2008 11:58 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: 5 minutes?"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

You know, even if I provided a patch, it would probably sit in a stockpile of patches, never taken care of. Like most patches are. So why bother?


Translation: why bother trying to fix a problem when you can just whinge about it endlessly?

Reply Score: 9

RE[4]: 5 minutes?
by hughesjr on Sun 6th Jul 2008 21:22 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: 5 minutes?"
hughesjr Member since:
2006-10-29

It would not need to set in your package. If you want something changed, build it yourself.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: 5 minutes?
by JonathanBThompson on Sun 6th Jul 2008 04:11 UTC in reply to "RE: 5 minutes?"
JonathanBThompson Member since:
2006-05-26

Does that 5 hours for you include all the requisite QA that really needs to be done to verify that it doesn't screw up more than it supposedly fixes?

If you have serious experience in development with complex projects, you'd be more aware that those 5 minute changes often have much greater repercussions than you'd think, and you need to verify that you haven't forgotten something before you submit it into the great wide open. Something that can be added in 5 minutes without proper consideration and testing can have a multiplier effect in terms of all the things that no longer work as intended or expected, and this is multiplied by the number of users times the number of things it breaks for the users. If the QA is thorough, that by itself is not a 5 minute thing, and may take some unpredictable amount of time, due to ensuring that all test cases (this appears to be a highly visual thing that needs to be checked manually, making it that much more of a hassle) pass that are known, and taking reasonable efforts to putting negative tests into place: purposely trying to break things to see if they will break.

Stick to your editorials, and don't go presuming you can instruct developers on how to do their work, or that they should work on your pet project, regardless of how valuable you think it is. At best, this is merely an "enhancement" which is in the eye of the beholder (or in the case of FOSS, in the eye of the beerholder) and may cause more problems than it solves for others. Just for example: how deeply have you analyzed your suggestions for those with color perception issues? There's lots of standard editor themes that for me, even though I have no color perception problems from a medically verifiable standpoint, are horribly intolerable and useless to me, due to sensitivities, but then again, they may work fine for those that are some variation of colorblind. As long as others don't force me to use those themes, ok, I can deal with that. Have you verified that your suggestion is readable to everyone that may use it on the various rendering devices (LCD, plasma, CRT, etc.) and aren't just setup well for a single device? I'm hoping you can see that there may be far more involved than you think when it comes to making a change that affects a lot of people like this.

Reply Score: 20

RE[3]: 5 minutes?
by evangs on Sun 6th Jul 2008 06:44 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: 5 minutes?"
evangs Member since:
2005-07-07

Does that 5 hours for you include all the requisite QA that really needs to be done to verify that it doesn't screw up more than it supposedly fixes?


Exactly, nothing ever takes 5 minutes to fix.

I used to play world of warcraft in my free time, and it was painful reading the forums. There were hundreds if not thousands of clueless kids who presumed to tell the developers that fixing stuff like network lag(!! lol!) was a 5 minute job and that they should get right on it.

I had a good laugh, then a good cry and then I left that place for good.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: 5 minutes?
by boofar on Mon 7th Jul 2008 17:32 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: 5 minutes?"
boofar Member since:
2008-04-23

Exactly, nothing ever takes 5 minutes to fix.


If I were asked to create a top-10 programmer's words of wisdom list. this would be close to the top. There is simply _nothing_ that takes 5 minutes to fix, no matter how trivial.

It's a running joke where I work. A customer will report a major bug, and someone will comment "How hard can it be? This is surely a 5-minute-fix." Then will all have a good laugh, before trying to figure out what the f*** is wrong this time.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: 5 minutes?
by jwwf on Sun 6th Jul 2008 15:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: 5 minutes?"
jwwf Member since:
2006-01-19

Wait, they do QA???

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: 5 minutes?
by Lunitik on Sun 6th Jul 2008 07:20 UTC in reply to "RE: 5 minutes?"
Lunitik Member since:
2005-08-07

The screenshot you post isn't even of something that is part of Gnome...

Try posting the "bug" to the right place perhaps? Also, why are you using OSNews to publicize something you think is important, but which no one else really cares about?

The only good thing about SLAB is that you can remove it from the panel.

Reply Score: 6

RE[3]: 5 minutes?
by Howie S on Tue 8th Jul 2008 03:43 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: 5 minutes?"
Howie S Member since:
2005-07-14

Why so much venom in these comments?

Technological progress happens because of one thing: INNOVATION. If the linux community puts up such high walls over such a simple feature request, what does that say about it's willingess to adapt and innovate?

So sad.

People get so fixated on the particular technology -- in this case, some aspect of GNOME -- that they have to make the problems fit the technology and not the other way around. How crazy is that?

What I'm trying to say is that instead of asking "How can we make GNOME better?", we should be asking "How can we make DE's (desktop environments) that are more easily modified by the user to fit their custom requirements?" Instead of searching for the elusive, best possible 'one size fits all' result, we need to keep it simple and allow the user more freedom of choice and that includes the choice to more easily create their own solutions.

Linux is free, sure, but the barriers for customization are intimidating to most. When the proposed change can be implemented as easily as writing a Firefox add-on, an xml file, or a cascading stylesheet, maybe then we'll have the creative freedom that is sorely needed.

Edited 2008-07-08 03:58 UTC

Reply Score: 1

v You're asking impossible things
by AnXa on Sat 5th Jul 2008 23:21 UTC
5 minutes
by thecwin on Sat 5th Jul 2008 23:53 UTC
thecwin
Member since:
2006-01-04

I don't think it's fair to say it's five minutes of work. Hell I don't think it's fair to say even five hours. If it was that easy, someone else would have done it already (for example, Adium).

http://developer.pidgin.im/ticket/34

"This WILL happen eventually, but it is a rather large undertaking [...] If you really want to help, have 15 hours a week of free time, have at least five years experienced programming in C and have experience with undocumented network protocols"

I've worked with the MSN protocol, GTK, GStreamer and I can't see this being a simple job. Especially as aMSN, gaim-vv never really worked properly with voice/video anyway.

Admittedly, it could be done faster than it is being done, but that page said that the core devs aren't particularly interested, and I don't blame them. While I'm sure that there are many people who do have a use for it, it is open source and the pidgin developers don't have to work on it if they don't want to. Especially as there are plenty of other, arguably more important omissions in Pidgin right now.

Reply Score: 11

v RE: 5 minutes
by Eugenia on Sun 6th Jul 2008 00:02 UTC in reply to "5 minutes"
RE[2]: 5 minutes
by thecwin on Sun 6th Jul 2008 23:59 UTC in reply to "RE: 5 minutes"
thecwin Member since:
2006-01-04

Sorry, I missed the underline of the link. My automatic 'error correction' probably filtered out the "or" to make it make sense.

No offense intended.

Reply Score: 2

RE: 5 minutes
by kaiwai on Sun 6th Jul 2008 04:25 UTC in reply to "5 minutes"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't think it's fair to say it's five minutes of work. Hell I don't think it's fair to say even five hours. If it was that easy, someone else would have done it already (for example, Adium).

http://developer.pidgin.im/ticket/34

"This WILL happen eventually, but it is a rather large undertaking [...] If you really want to help, have 15 hours a week of free time, have at least five years experienced programming in C and have experience with undocumented network protocols"

I've worked with the MSN protocol, GTK, GStreamer and I can't see this being a simple job. Especially as aMSN, gaim-vv never really worked properly with voice/video anyway.

Admittedly, it could be done faster than it is being done, but that page said that the core devs aren't particularly interested, and I don't blame them. While I'm sure that there are many people who do have a use for it, it is open source and the pidgin developers don't have to work on it if they don't want to. Especially as there are plenty of other, arguably more important omissions in Pidgin right now.


True, but at the same time, they've already implemented the msn14, which has p2p file transferring; one could always hack around and use that very protocol to deliver video and the client to, rather than save it, stream it directly to some sort of output.

I'm not too sure about the compatibility with existing MSN clients given that it would be hacking up something to do something it was never designed to, as for the quality, I'd say that the video portion of the protocol was designed with QOS in mind so that the quality of the video/audio was as good as it can be.

With that being said, however, Microsoft is apparently going to change their MSN protocol again to what Microsoft's Communication Server uses - IIRC, the Microsoft Communication Server protocols documentation has been opened as part of the 50K page dump recently - so hopefully once Microsoft moves to that protocol for their MSN service, achieving compatibility with it should be alot easier.

Reply Score: 2

Well done Eugenia!
by ralph on Sun 6th Jul 2008 00:05 UTC
ralph
Member since:
2005-07-10

Abuse a submission about new features in Ubuntu to troll about some Gnome pet peeves and attack those evil developers (remember, the ones you flamed against and later had to appologize to because of all your lies).

The discussion will of course now be entirely about your trolling, not about the article or the subject it discusses. But then I guess, that's exactly what trolls try to accomplish, isn't it? So, well done.

Reply Locked Score: 1

v RE: Well done Eugenia!
by Eugenia on Sun 6th Jul 2008 00:08 UTC in reply to "Well done Eugenia!"
RE[2]: Well done Eugenia!
by OddFox on Sun 6th Jul 2008 00:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Well done Eugenia!"
OddFox Member since:
2005-10-05

Regardless of whether you clearly marked it as "My Take" it was an incredibly ignorant comment to make in the context of the discussion. If you've been complaining for so long about something like that gnome-control-center/gtk+ gripe how have you not even taken the time to educate yourself as to why, exactly, it is something that can't be done within the current toolkit framework? If it's really that big of a deal for you, take advantage of the source code being available for modification and have the change implemented yourself or by someone else on your behalf somehow. If it doesn't have to be a new theme, if it really only requires a clever bit of interface design, then maybe you should educate yourself on how you can fix it to your satisfaction and then give yourself a pat on the back for actually giving back to the community in the true spirit of F/OSS.

I don't want to really even touch the whole V/V jab at the Pidgin developers but seriously, given that you have no idea how monumental a task it is to implement that functionality, why don't you take a step back and realize that you're being incredibly thoughtless. Progress takes time and motivation, and I don't see many people offering to pay any developers to go to work on this particular issue. You might think it's not a big deal, but apparently enough devs think its a big enough deal that they simply have no motivation whatsoever to try to undertake the task of fully compatible voice/video for the various services supported by libpurple.

And please lay off with the lamenting that if you were to bother yourself with fixing something that only you are clamoring about the devs would throw your patch in the trashbin. It is nothing but speculation and unprovable until you actually decide to step up to the plate and test the waters.

Reply Score: 20

RE[2]: Well done Eugenia!
by VistaUser on Sun 6th Jul 2008 15:14 UTC in reply to "RE: Well done Eugenia!"
VistaUser Member since:
2008-03-08

I agree with that - problems with Gnome are also problems for all the distro's that use it.

There is a collective "responsibility" to upstream.

Reply Score: 1

And what features would have been exciting?
by asgard on Sun 6th Jul 2008 00:12 UTC
asgard
Member since:
2008-06-07

I wonder, isn't that "nothing really exciting" a mark of maturity of Linux Desktop? What features would have been exciting and what features would you like to see?

I don't mean complete overhauls of some application or window environment, nor bugfixes, but something that can be reasonably developed or polished from existing open source software during 3 months of the release cycle.

Reply Score: 6

Thank you Eugenia
by ralphisback on Sun 6th Jul 2008 00:29 UTC
ralphisback
Member since:
2008-07-06

Just wanted to take the opportunity to thank Eugenia for deleting my account.

I think it speaks of tremendous maturity not only to tell us that "f--k all those open source lusers" is a healthy attitude for an editor, but then also not to hesitate to delete the accounts of people who might call this terrible editing and, gosh, trolling.

Well done Eugenia.

P.S.: As I'm dying to get mail from you, could you resent your email to the address associated with this account? I really can't wait to read how you tell me that you never lied and never had to publicly appologize about your lies, but the address you send your mail to is unfortunately no longer active.
Thanks and now have fun deleting this account.

Reply Score: 27

v RE: Thank you Eugenia
by Eugenia on Sun 6th Jul 2008 00:40 UTC in reply to "Thank you Eugenia"
RE[2]: Thank you Eugenia
by ralphisback on Sun 6th Jul 2008 00:49 UTC in reply to "RE: Thank you Eugenia"
ralphisback Member since:
2008-07-06

You're welcome!
The pleasure was all mine.

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: Thank you Eugenia
by BallmerKnowsBest on Sun 6th Jul 2008 12:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Thank you Eugenia"
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

Your account was never deleted, it was temporarily suspended because you started writing your crap everywhere.


When you say "writing your crap everywhere," I assume you're referring to something besides than the grand total of 3 recent posts shown in his comment history?

BTW, thank for proving my earlier post: that OSNews admins completely neglect comment moderation, until someone posts a comment that you personally take exception to.

But you got your wish. I leave the osnews posting to David until Thom gets well. I really don't need that osnews shit again. I left osnews in 2005 for a reason: because it had started to piss me off.


In other words: you made a post that was 30% relevant content, 70% self-indulgent whining. And now that people have risen to your (blatant) flamebait, you're going to affect victimhood. See that red spot on my shirt? That's my heart bleeding for you.

Almost as amusing as your "I'm taking my ball and going home" blog post (with comments disabled, naturally). I'm frankly amazed that you don't have a writeup on Encyclopedia Dramatica yet - maybe I should remedy that...

Edited 2008-07-06 12:55 UTC

Reply Score: 19

RE[3]: Thank you Eugenia
by OddFox on Sun 6th Jul 2008 20:12 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Thank you Eugenia"
OddFox Member since:
2005-10-05

Almost as amusing as your "I'm taking my ball and going home" blog post (with comments disabled, naturally). I'm frankly amazed that you don't have a writeup on Encyclopedia Dramatica yet - maybe I should remedy that...


My thoughts precisely. I'm pretty sure that most of the frequent users of this site would be happy with a "Sorry, my bad" but the arrogance on display here is breathtaking. "What? All I did was say fsck this and fsck that and fsck you! I'm right because look at this bug report which is merely a feature request from ages back that obviously is such a high priority in the minds of all! My logic is undeniable!"

Surprised this whole posting and thread hasn't been nuked yet, but at least she's not trying to cover up stirring the hornets nest and getting what she asked for. Yet.

Reply Score: 10

RE[4]: Thank you Eugenia
by Valhalla on Mon 7th Jul 2008 06:16 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Thank you Eugenia"
Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

well, I think it boils down to Eugenia simply being at the wrong place at the wrong time. she has stated several times, that she no longer has any interest whatsoever (to put it mildly) in os'es. I don't know exactly why, but she sure seem very bitter about it. now bitter people on OSNews is not exactly a new occurence, sure. but having a moderator show not only a total disinterest, but also what comes across as resentment towards the actual subject matter on which OSNews bases it's existance is simply a bad recipe.

I can't help but think that for both OSNews sake and the sake of Eugenia herself, she should stick to her gadgets and videography from here on.

Reply Score: 7

RE[5]: Thank you Eugenia
by zizban on Mon 7th Jul 2008 12:56 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Thank you Eugenia"
zizban Member since:
2005-07-06

I just read her blog post and I was shocked and offended by what I read. Eugenia needs to resign from OSNews. Her credibility is in question and her bias obvious. Get someone else.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Thank you Eugenia
by Adam S on Mon 7th Jul 2008 14:46 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Thank you Eugenia"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

BTW, thank for proving my earlier post: that OSNews admins completely neglect comment moderation, until someone posts a comment that you personally take exception to.


Excuse me, sir, but please don't generalize your comments to apply to all OSNews editors. You don't know what really goes on in the database and with your fellow users, but I do. Since implementing peer moderation, we've only done about .3% of ALL moderation on the site. That's POINT three percent.

It's hardly fair for you to take your frustrations with one person out on everyone.

Reply Score: 3

v RE[4]: Thank you Eugenia
by aitvo on Mon 7th Jul 2008 15:48 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Thank you Eugenia"
RE[5]: Thank you Eugenia
by aitvo on Mon 7th Jul 2008 16:47 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Thank you Eugenia"
aitvo Member since:
2006-09-03

You don't moderate, yet my comments went from +8 +5 and +2 to all being -5.

Yep, you don't moderate.

Seems like you still have a problem even if you yourself won't admit it.

Thanks.

Reply Score: 2

v RE[2]: Thank you Eugenia
by aitvo on Sun 6th Jul 2008 13:22 UTC in reply to "RE: Thank you Eugenia"
v RE[3]: Thank you Eugenia
by aitvo on Sun 6th Jul 2008 15:22 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Thank you Eugenia"
RE[2]: Thank you Eugenia
by ebasconp on Sun 6th Jul 2008 15:23 UTC in reply to "RE: Thank you Eugenia"
ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

I am a developer too and because of that, I would not compare my work to the KDE/Gnome developer's work! KDE/Gnome developers deserve a lot of respect... I did not give my work to the community as they did. Maybe a little humbleness is missing, isn't it?

What's wrong with you Eugenia? The last two posts in OSNews are full of your modded down comments!

How can you ban or "temporarily disable" someone's account because he is posting "crap everywhere"...

Will I have the same possibility of ban or disable the accounts of people that disagree with me? that mod me down? that reply me with things I do not want to hear? I do not think so... Thus, someone here is abusing the power she has in OSNews.

Edited 2008-07-06 15:24 UTC

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: Thank you Eugenia
by OMRebel on Mon 7th Jul 2008 16:00 UTC in reply to "RE: Thank you Eugenia"
OMRebel Member since:
2005-11-14

Good, and do all of us a favor and don't ever come back. I just read your blog, and hope your arse never comes back here again.

Reply Score: 2

How These Features
by shollomon on Sun 6th Jul 2008 00:35 UTC
shollomon
Member since:
2008-07-06

How about fixing some stuff that's not really sexy and does not work worth a damn. First start with power management, particularly suspend and resume to either disk or RAM, make that work right. I really like a better than 75% chance that my system will resume after it suspends.

Then they might consider giving Ubuntu decent multi-monitor support and good support for docking station video and audio. How about a decent UI for setting up multi-monitors and screen resolution that would mean a user never, ever has to even think about editing xorg.conf (that spawn of satan).

Reply Score: 7

RE: How These Features
by s-peter on Sun 6th Jul 2008 01:05 UTC in reply to "How These Features"
s-peter Member since:
2006-01-29

How about fixing some stuff that's not really sexy and does not work worth a damn. First start with power management, particularly suspend and resume to either disk or RAM, make that work right. I really like a better than 75% chance that my system will resume after it suspends.


Agreed. Though many applications (e.g. firefox, eclipse) support resuming where they were, so nowadays I don't mind shutting down and restarting as much as before.

Then they might consider giving Ubuntu decent multi-monitor support and good support for docking station video and audio. How about a decent UI for setting up multi-monitors and screen resolution that would mean a user never, ever has to even think about editing xorg.conf (that spawn of satan).


Multi-monitor support has improved greatly with 8.04; I was about to switch back to Windows just for this reason after years of using Linux as my main OS, but luckily 8.04 solved most of my issues so I didn't have to. There is a nice UI available too. YMMV for different models, but it is definitely an area that has been focused on, which also means that if you still encounter problems, you have good chances of getting them fixed by filing bug reports.

My biggest issues have been with multilingual input (SCIM) and audio with proprietary software (flash, skype).

Reply Score: 2

Pidgin
by Xaero_Vincent on Sun 6th Jul 2008 00:57 UTC
Xaero_Vincent
Member since:
2006-08-18

Yeah... there really is no excuse for Pidgin not to have webcam or voice chat support. The developers say its time consuming and nobody is up to the task.

So how did aMSN and GYachE Improved do it?

Maybe they should exchange some notes? ;-)

Edited 2008-07-06 01:00 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE: Pidgin
by OddFox on Sun 6th Jul 2008 01:11 UTC in reply to "Pidgin"
OddFox Member since:
2005-10-05

Ah, very interesting the aMSN support for video, along with limited voice support, I hadn't heard about all that. I take it the support is cross-platform? Worked just fine setting things up over here on my Windows install but I don't have anyone handy at just this moment to test the functionality first-hand. aMSN is licensed under the GPL apparently so code-sharing should be quite possible, I think the Pidgin devs will likely lift it once they start trying to implement full v/v support. Kinda got me wondering if the aMSN team got the code from the gaim-vv projects efforts?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Pidgin
by Xaero_Vincent on Sun 6th Jul 2008 01:32 UTC in reply to "Pidgin"
Xaero_Vincent Member since:
2006-08-18

I doubt it gaim-vv has been dead for a long time now.

I've known about aMSN for awhile now.

But I just found out about GYachE Improved today.

GYachE Improved just blows Pidgin's Yahoo support out of the water. It can literally be compared to Y!mLite for *nix.

Pidgin is about to get kicked off my desktop.

Edited 2008-07-06 01:39 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Pidgin
by pandronic on Sun 6th Jul 2008 07:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Pidgin"
pandronic Member since:
2006-05-18

GYachE Improved really sucks because of the GUI. It's simply a nightmare. There are so many wrong things that I don't know where to start. I'd rather use meebo than this.

It seems to have a lot of Yahoo features that lack from Pidgin like buzz, fade colors, login as invisible (implemented properly), some audible and IMviroment support, webcam support and even something that puzzles me ... Yahoo chat support, but these features seem to be put one on top of the other to a degree that you struggle to use this application.

Edited 2008-07-06 07:21 UTC

Reply Score: 2

bannor99
Member since:
2005-09-15

It should be "IntREpid" not "IntERpid".
I know the linked article got it wrong but no reason for
OSnews to propagate their error.

Thank you.

Reply Score: 3

hehehe
by ronaldst on Sun 6th Jul 2008 01:46 UTC
ronaldst
Member since:
2005-06-29

If you offended their little puritan reality then the offended can go read another site. Or grow some brains and pay attention when someone points out the obvious.

;)

Reply Score: 2

RE: hehehe
by Soulbender on Mon 7th Jul 2008 08:53 UTC in reply to "hehehe"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

I'm not offended but he's just using excessive profanity to mask the fact that he has nothing substantial to say.
The blog being incredibly trite and boring is just a side-effect.

Reply Score: 3

new features are nice
by buff on Sun 6th Jul 2008 02:11 UTC
buff
Member since:
2005-11-12

The new features sound nice. I hope the Live installer works this time on my older Athlon box. The only other issue I have with Ubuntu is the lack of specific package installation during a clean install. I don't know exactly what the Ubuntu developers have done with Flash but their nice work has decreased the Firefox crashes I was getting from the Flash plugin. I'm not a big Flash fan but once in a while I feel the need to watch a skateboarding bulldog for no apparent reason.

Reply Score: 2

usb flash drive boot question
by UberGeek5150 on Sun 6th Jul 2008 03:14 UTC
UberGeek5150
Member since:
2008-07-06

I have a question about installing Ubuntu to a flash drive. If i can set my motherboard up to boot the flash drive does that mean i can unhook my ide or sata drive and still boot up like normal with the usb flash drive? Im planning on building an arcade machine... i would like not to have to use a hard drive if possible.

Reply Score: 1

New theme...
by HangLoose on Sun 6th Jul 2008 06:38 UTC
HangLoose
Member since:
2007-09-03

Doesnt the new theme looks like the Ubuntu Satanic version with a little orange detail on the top ?

http://ubuntusatanic.org/screenshots.php

Ubuntu Christians will throw holly water on it:
http://www.whatwouldjesusdownload.com/christianubuntu/2006/07/about...

Reply Score: 1

RE: New theme...
by StephenBeDoper on Sun 6th Jul 2008 13:01 UTC in reply to "New theme..."
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

That is hilarious! I can't tell if "Ubuntu Christian Edition" is a serious distro, or simply an Onion joke that went wwaaaaay too far.

Reply Score: 2

v linux still lacks of antimalware protection
by casuto on Sun 6th Jul 2008 08:34 UTC
asgard Member since:
2008-06-07

I think it lacks malware to begin with.

Reply Score: 5

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

linux still lacks of antimalware protection


Linux distributions ship mostly open source code ... some of them go to quite some lengths to ship only open source code.

Open source code means that anyone can compile the code for themselves, to ensure that the source they see creates the package as shipped.

Open source code also means that any developer/programmer who has an interest in actually using that can look at the source and assure themselves that there is no malware within it.

So, as an end user of a Linux distribution ... if you adopt a policy of installing only open source code from the distribution's repository ... you then know that you are using code that developers/programmers have the ability to audit and they are using it themselves. No-one is going to use code where anyone can see how it works and yet it still contains malware.

Hence ... that code doesn't have malware in it. As asgard said it far more succinctly: "I think it lacks malware to begin with."

In other words ... malware is necessarily constrained to closed-source programs only for its delivery.

Edited 2008-07-06 10:28 UTC

Reply Score: 3

ba1l Member since:
2007-09-08

True enough.

However, it's a bit tricky to write a piece of software to detect something that doesn't exist. Yet.

Essentially, all Windows anti-malware applications work on two principles. First, a database of known malware and some mechanism of detecting it, and secondly a database of known hooks said malware commonly uses. Most, in fact, only have the first. Complex ones for advanced users who know what they're doing have the second.

Since there isn't any malware yet, and there's really no way to know exactly where this hypothetical malware would install itself, it's kind of impossible to write an anti-malware tool.

That said, there are rootkit scanners, intrusion detection tools, and tools to check the integrity of installed software. They're all targeted at servers, of course, since that's where the only existing Linux malware is.

Reply Score: 2

Spook327 Member since:
2008-07-07

There's rkhunter and chkrootkit, which it doesn't hurt to run once in a while.

But seriously, there's virtually no need for malware detection; people just aren't targetting <1% of the desktop market with that sort of thing.

Reply Score: 2

relativity
by netpython on Sun 6th Jul 2008 08:42 UTC
netpython
Member since:
2005-07-06

According to the only source i take serious in this regard:https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/intrepid/+specs?show=all

The encrypted private directory is rated as low. Furthermore if you have a look at the allready approved blueprints you get the idea.

my 2 cents for what seems to be taken out of its proportions altogether.

Reply Score: 4

If you are still reading this Eugenia
by dimosd on Sun 6th Jul 2008 09:11 UTC
dimosd
Member since:
2006-02-10

I underestand your frustration and loss of hope with OSS. I used to be a "somewhat" active "good citizen" sending bug reports, fixes, patches etc. but the work never ended and nothing really seemed to progress. Just fixing the same broken wheel again and again.

So basically, I don't bother any more but also I don't come back to pick up fights with young, naive, overexcited geeks who aren't burnt out yet.

Regarding Linux haters' blog: although he has a point in many things he writes (minus the profanities) you'll notice that he doesn't actually offer a solution. He doesn't dare to say "...Linux sucks... use Windows/MacOSX instead" because then he would have to defend a position. But he's on the blogging business just to make some noise and protect his ass (a.k.a. professional troll)

In conclusion, if you think computers aren't as worth your commitment as you used to think or as much fun as they used to be (growing pains...), you could just leave and turn to other activities. Many have been there. Don't demand that others do the same though... they won't listen.

Edited 2008-07-06 09:17 UTC

Reply Score: 9

-oblio- Member since:
2008-05-27

He did offer a solution, for example for LSB. That solution was to standardize (at least between the major distros*, because no one** cares about Gobolinux) the binaries. He was also supportive of the synchronized releases system.

Both of which won't happen because of "features" and "product differentiation" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_differentiation). For example, how many new features can libc get in 2 years' time? (and why would you want new features in libc?!)
Some things should be standardized, and you could only add on top of that.

Then, on the next cycle, you could change the versions.

Not glamorous, but ultra effective. And remember kids, different base libraries version don't offer more choices, they hinder them. What you want is more higher quality application alternatives (for the "free software is about freedom to choose" fanatics ;) ).

*Red Hat (aka Fedora, CentOS + other clones), SUSE (aka openSUSE), Debian (+ derivates), Ubuntu (which has marketing clout), Linspire/Xandros. Gentoo can't be counted in because of the development policy, Slackware has 3 people developing in, PCLinuxOS also has few people developing it. Basically if Red Hat, SUSE, Debian and Ubuntu will agree to something, everyone would follow in due time.
**No one = 1% or less of the Linux desktop population.

Edited 2008-07-07 07:33 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Comment by sakeniwefu
by sakeniwefu on Sun 6th Jul 2008 11:21 UTC
sakeniwefu
Member since:
2008-02-26

1- New theme. Not really needed, although Xubuntu does offer nicer themes by default.
2- Encrypted "Private" directory. Throwing all your sensitive data into a single "Don't open this" folder isn't the greatest idea. Encrypted drive isn't either. They work for casual data thieves, but any government will just rubber hose cryptanalyze you as soon as they find your folder, and you don't really have to be hiding anything from them for that to happen. The less conspicuous your encrypted files look, the better for you. It's even better if you can hide the fact that you are carrying any encrypted data at all.
3- Flash. Ubuntu should just come with the swfdec plugin. It plays Youtube and doesn't hang anymore. Let people install Adobe's plugin by themselves if some crappy page fails on them.
4- Setup slideshow. Nice. Installing a huge system can be boring.
5- Live-USB. Nice.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by sakeniwefu
by netpython on Sun 6th Jul 2008 15:15 UTC in reply to "Comment by sakeniwefu"
netpython Member since:
2005-07-06

If the private directory is mounted the encrytption is not in use.

If the private/revoke key is on the same machine it's similar not very usefull.

A default simple "chmod -R go-rwx /home/*" which even root can't alter only the owner is the same security through obscurity imho.

There simply are way more attack tools for *nix then security products :-)

Windows is the only OS that i know off that doesn't give you during the instalation ore soon thereafter, the opportunity of installing a whatever flavour free fullblown development environment.

Edited 2008-07-06 15:16 UTC

Reply Score: 2

filenames not encrypted
by evert on Sun 6th Jul 2008 14:46 UTC
evert
Member since:
2005-07-06

it is a very bad idea to only encrypt the file contents, but not the filenames. others can still see which kind of files you have, even without a password.

truecrypt would be a better option.

Reply Score: 2

RE: filenames not encrypted
by aitvo on Sun 6th Jul 2008 14:51 UTC in reply to "filenames not encrypted"
aitvo Member since:
2006-09-03

Without encrypted swap and temp, it's pointless to encrypt files and filenames.

It's as easy as steal -> put drive in new device -> strings /dev/swap partition.

The OS is even irrelevant.

The only good answer (currently) is a drive that self encrypts, OR a fully encrypted disk.

Unless you just want to obscure files, and don't care if the contents are retrievable on theft. In that case, encrypting a file system without a signature is fine as long as you don't keep shell history or event logs anyway.

:-D

I'm eager to play with Truecrypt whole disk encryption, but LUKS for everything but /boot seems to work very well.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: filenames not encrypted
by aitvo on Sun 6th Jul 2008 15:19 UTC in reply to "RE: filenames not encrypted"
aitvo Member since:
2006-09-03

Replied to wrong thread..

Edited 2008-07-06 15:32 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Here we go yet again....
by cmost on Sun 6th Jul 2008 15:30 UTC
cmost
Member since:
2006-07-16

Note to Ubuntu developers: Stop wasting time adding whiz-bang new features when many people still cannot get key hardware to work without a hassle. Also, if you insist on adding new features, make sure they work as advertised. You might be interested to know that your installer remains confusing for people who exclusively use Windows as well as your grandmother. Thirdly (and this goes to Gnome developers too) fix the damn bugs already!!!! Some of them have been around for several editions now. If KDE can build an entirely new desktop, however reviled, then the least you can do is fix some bugs. Thanks!

Reply Score: 3

Totem
by Finalzone on Sun 6th Jul 2008 15:32 UTC
Finalzone
Member since:
2005-07-06

the default Totem installation not de-interlacing my camcomder-derived home videos and DVDs because GStreamer doesn't support it...

FYI, Totem now has both Gstreamer and Xine backend.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Totem
by apoclypse on Sun 6th Jul 2008 21:45 UTC in reply to "Totem"
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

FYI Totem BEEN having gstreamer and Xine backends for years.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Totem
by Finalzone on Mon 7th Jul 2008 08:23 UTC in reply to "RE: Totem"
Finalzone Member since:
2005-07-06

FYI Totem BEEN having gstreamer and Xine backends for years.

Using both gstreamer and Xine backends on the same frontend without removing one of them is fairly recent.

Reply Score: 2

satanic theme
by buff on Sun 6th Jul 2008 16:08 UTC
buff
Member since:
2005-11-12

Doesnt the new theme looks like the Ubuntu Satanic version with a little orange detail on the top ?

The satanic theme is funny. So the arrows and other controls are blood red. Should be perfect for the goth kids. I can see skinnypuppy fans lining up to download it now. ;-)

Reply Score: 2

Comment by moleskine
by moleskine on Sun 6th Jul 2008 16:15 UTC
moleskine
Member since:
2005-11-05

Er, whose top five new features?

Are these the official new features, so to speak, promoted by Ubuntu, or five putative top features put out by a guy keen to get his blog read?

Either way, they don't seem to bear much resemblance to Mark Shuttleworth's own description of the next version of Ubuntu:

"Our desktop offering will once again be a focal point as we reengineer the user interaction model so that Ubuntu works as well on a high-end workstation as it does on a feisty little subnotebook. We'll also be reaching new peaks of performance—aiming to make the mobile desktop as productive as possible. ... A particular focus for us will be pervasive Internet access, the ability to tap into bandwidth whenever and wherever you happen to be."


It might be better to listen to what comes from the Intrepid Ibex's mouth than to some bloke on the internet. If Ubuntu really have scaled back Shuttleworth's vision to these five features then, hmmn, not at all much to get excited about. So who's nearer the truth?

Just my 2 cents, but Eugenia has a good point about that panel design thing. It is easier to read if designed in the way she suggests.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by moleskine
by shotsman on Sun 6th Jul 2008 16:41 UTC in reply to "Comment by moleskine"
shotsman Member since:
2005-07-22

Well Said.
You got my point exactly.

As I see it, the latest release of Ubuntu is pretty poor. There have been numerous cases cited where things that worked in V7.x now fail miserably.
This is akin to the pile of rotting seaweed that Fedora Core 4 was.
We should all face up to the facts that once in a while those who release the distros we know and love sometimes throw us a curve ball.
This release might very well be that for Ubuntu.
I'm sure they will get it right for the next one (after Ibex possibly) as the feature list is somewhat bare. Perhaps they should not implement any new features just concentrate on fixing the bugs with the current one.

I also hope that some of the Ubuntu 'fan-boys' realise that Ubuntu & 'apt-get' is not the answer to 'Life, the Universe and Everything' ( I read this somewhere recently but can't remember where and found it very 'apt'...pun intended)
Edited to fix two typos

Edited 2008-07-06 16:43 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by moleskine
by netpython on Sun 6th Jul 2008 18:11 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by moleskine"
netpython Member since:
2005-07-06

True, i rather prefer OpenSuSE 11.

Reply Score: 2

Very good work
by hraq on Sun 6th Jul 2008 17:57 UTC
hraq
Member since:
2005-07-06

I believe that ubuntu is doing great. They are not intending to introduce alot of features that will never work fine. Instead they will take care of bugs on 8.04 and correct them in 8.10. I know that alot of people wants everything and wants it quickly, well thats the human nature, but there are limitations in resources and you cannot get what you want on the time you want.

Reply Score: 3

five minutes
by spikeb on Sun 6th Jul 2008 21:14 UTC
spikeb
Member since:
2006-01-18

if it is so trivial, do it yourself.

Reply Score: 2

RE: five minutes
by zizban on Sun 6th Jul 2008 21:23 UTC in reply to "five minutes"
zizban Member since:
2005-07-06

Eugenia filed that bug years ago. In all this time she could have submitted a patch for it, but didn't.

Reply Score: 4

Let's go through these...
by deathshadow on Mon 7th Jul 2008 04:45 UTC
deathshadow
Member since:
2005-07-12

Of the 'features' two are just stupid, two I could care less about, and the last one sounds like a decent idea.

1) The New Theme - OH FOR **** SAKE. Jesus H jumped up mary and joseph LEAVE THIS **** ALONE. What, you've got dozens of errors that could be fixed or features that could be implemented, and AGAIN time is wasted on YET ANOTHER malfing theme.

2) Encrypted Private directory - Because permissions are too complex or something? Eh, I guess the paranoid will like it... though really if you NEED something like this in a *nix environment you've got bigger problems.

3) Improved Flash - Ok, this could be useful since media playback in Linux is still like pulling teeth. Too bad the only reason they are doing it is some flashtard is probably bloating out a website wasting flash on presentational elements or nuetering accessability by making the whole site in flash. After all, there's a reason it's called flash and not substance.

4) LiveCD installer - Eh, ok. I guess. I use the alternate CD's because I find the live CD too malfing slow to actually install from. I can be half way through partitioning before the liveCD is even finished booting.

5) LiveUSB Creator - possibly much more useful given that the capacities of flash keys are more than large enough for a minimalist environment and the access times are often faster than hard drives. The ability to 'build your own' is overdue.

Edited 2008-07-07 04:47 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Let's go through these...
by ba1l on Mon 7th Jul 2008 07:53 UTC in reply to "Let's go through these..."
ba1l Member since:
2007-09-08

Do you really think that the people capable of developing a theme are also capable of working on the "dozens of errors that could be fixed or features that could be implemented"?

They aren't. Completely different skillsets. What one group is doing doesn't prevent the other group from doing something else.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Let's go through these...
by wannabe geek on Mon 7th Jul 2008 17:03 UTC in reply to "Let's go through these..."
wannabe geek Member since:
2006-09-27


2) Encrypted Private directory - Because permissions are too complex or something? Eh, I guess the paranoid will like it... though really if you NEED something like this in a *nix environment you've got bigger problems.


The point of encrypted partitions is that if, say, you get your laptop stolen, at least the confidential information in it can't be easily retrieved. This is not true for mere permission-protected files. Having an encrypted directory instead of an encrypted partition is, of course, much more flexible and convenient. If anything, one may wonder why it was not available before.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Let's go through these...
by miscz on Mon 7th Jul 2008 17:12 UTC in reply to "Let's go through these..."
miscz Member since:
2005-07-17

2:
Encryption is very useful when person trying to read your data has physical access to the machine. You can log in as a root in any kind of environemnt (like LiveCD, or just another machine) and permissions won't help you a lot.

Reply Score: 2