Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Windows 8 Features With Linux Antecedents

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the all-stolen-from-vannevar-bush dept.

GUI 642

itwbennett writes "As details about new features in Windows 8 started to be discussed in the Building 8 blog and bandied about in Linux/Windows forums, Linux users were quick to chime in with a hearty 'Linux had that first' — even for things that were just a natural evolution, like native support for USB 3.0. So ask not 'did Linux have this first', but 'does Windows 8 do it better?'"

cancel ×

642 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (5, Funny)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998197)

The Microsoft twist: No Linux distro does ISO mounting as easily as Windows 8, as it requires some command line trickery (or, again, third-party tools).

Here's your "command line trickery" (once you've gotten superuser):

mkdir -p /mnt/iso
mount -o loop image.iso /mnt/iso

Did you see that trickery? Someone call the pope, I'm well on my way to sainthood after that "miracle." Hahah that's funny though, this guy should see some of the command line paragraphs I've typed out for stuff like ffmpeg back in the day. I think the author doesn't understand that there are many linux machines that are servers or headless and many distros that love to leave you the option of not having to run a window manager. As a result, it's almost always up to you if you want to run a heavy GUI to execute two whole commands.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (2, Insightful)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998271)

Right, because there's absolutely nothing arcane or overly complex about having to open a terminal window, read a bunch of man pages, and then issue two commands with various flags just to mount a disk image.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (5, Interesting)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998387)

Not for anyone who has bothered to learn how to use their computer. But then, that's just one way to do it on modern Linux distributions, which now simplify the process by letting you right click and mount the volume.

And has since the days I was using Daemon Tools on Windows.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998581)

Not for anyone who has bothered to learn how to use their computer.

Learning to use your computer should *NOT* require knowledge of shell command flags. The very attitude that it should, is why its so bloody hard to hire good product people. Not coders, not sysadmins, people who actually get users and what they want. (Also explains the huge salary gap seen in the IT world)

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998683)

Did you even read past that sentence?

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (5, Insightful)

RCL (891376) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998757)

That is why KDE and Gnome make this stuff easier. But there SHOULD be a way to do everything with shell commands, for users who are willing to learn them. Without that, I just don't have the feeling that I'm in control of the machine.

BTW, Windows actually has plenty of command line tools (made by Microsoft) which allow you to script much more than one might think without ever touching the GUI. Too bad a lot of the said tools aren't included by default and need to be searched for in various * Kit packages from Microsoft.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (5, Insightful)

bmo (77928) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998815)

Right, because the command line is so unimportant that Microsoft came up with an entirely new command shell called PowerShell and OSX has full-on bash.

You know, the two major OSes pointed at consumer idiots have powerful shells. Go figure.

--
BMO

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (5, Interesting)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998835)

Learning to use your computer should *NOT* require knowledge of shell command flags.

It should if you want to be considered proficient. It shouldn't be required for basic day to day operations, as I noted. But go on, be an angry anonymous coward.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (0)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998673)

Not for anyone who has bothered to learn how to use their computer.

So, for over 90% of people who use Windows computers.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1)

Jorl17 (1716772) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998839)

More like the majority of the 90% of people that were forced to use and learn to use Windows computers. Much like you were forced to speak and understand your language, not others. The difference is that one of the things was free and constructive, while the other was mostly an attempt at getting in your pockets.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998453)

Or you could click on it in Gnome/Nautilus (and probably whatever file manager KDE uses), but don't let that get in your way of your rant.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998467)

It's certainly no more arcane than having to learn which squashed bug you have to click.

On the other hand, I can just right click the iso in the GUI and open it with the archive manager as if it was a directory. It just depends of if you like GUI or command line.

Bottom line, it doesn't matter if you prefer GUI or CLI, Linux has had it covered for years.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (2, Interesting)

s.petry (762400) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998475)

KDE has build in point click for those to retarded to know the benefits of using the command line. I believe Gnome has an add on as well, but I hate Gnome so don't care if it does.

Look, even Microsoft started realizing (15 years to late) the benefits and power of the command line vs. depending on a GUI for everything that's done. Hence they released "Power Shell".

It is always refreshing to see an idiot fan boy that thinks it's hard to do things without a GUI though, so thanks for the laugh!

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998489)

We all speak English. That's pretty fucking arcane and complex. "mount -o loop image.iso /mountpoint" isn't any more arcane and complex than "loopback mount this image here".

And it's more convenient than using the GUI. Since you're managing files, you probably have a terminal open already. So it's really just a matter of typing the mount command. You don't even have to take your hands off the keyboard.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (0, Troll)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998703)

Why would I bother to have a terminal open when I can use something like Windows Explorer? Oh, right, you are using Linux and I am using Windows where I don't need to open a terminal for mundane tasks.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (5, Insightful)

Medievalist (16032) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998549)

Wow, that sounds hard! You have to do all that? Windows 8 must really suck!!!

In modern linux distributions, if there's an ISO on the media, it appears the same as any other container object, except the icon's a shiny CD looking disc instead of a manila folder. You click on it like any other container object, say for example a folder or an archive file, and it opens.

Why do you use windows if it makes you do all that crap?

And worse, with random abbreviations (2)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998565)

Things you mount aren't located in /mount, no it is /mnt. Ahh well that is so easy, I can't believe it didn't know that right off the top of my head!

That's what makes the *NIX command line even worse as a tool (not saying the Windows command line is better, but you needn't use it) is that commands are all kinds of random abbreviations. You can't make the argument with a straight face that it is "intuitive" or people can "use commands that seem natural." You don't list directories, you ls them, you don't put user programs in "Programs" you put them in /usr and it isn't short for "user" it is short for "unix system resource" of course that isn't what it originally meant since it used to be where user stuff is that is a backronym.

You really have to already know how to do what you want before you can do it. You can't stumble through things by looking through a list of menu options and finding the one that says what you want.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (0)

GreatBunzinni (642500) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998573)

Right, because there's absolutely nothing arcane or overly complex about having to open a terminal window,

What? Running a program is "arcane or complex"?

read a bunch of man pages

Reading is "arcane or complex"?

And no one needs to read man pages to learn how to use programs. This isn't 1994 anymore.

, and then issue two commands with various flags

those commands are "arcane or complex"?

just to mount a disk image.

You aren't exagerating or anything like that, are you?

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998653)

Except that a lot of GUIs on Linux do it too.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (3, Insightful)

inhuman_4 (1294516) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998669)

Right, because there's absolutely nothing arcane or overly complex about having to open a terminal window, read a bunch of man pages, and then issue two commands with various flags just to mount a disk image.

While yes it can be arcane to go through man pages to find out how to using things, I doubt many people do that anymore. If I need to know the command I go to google and type "Linux ${thing I want to do}" and get exactly what I need 90% of the time.

However what I find stupid is having to run a gui to do the stupidest little thing. For example:

Yesterday I had to print out quizzes for my students, I had 4 .doc versions of the quiz and needed 15 of each. On a gui I would have to this 4 times: 1) LibreOffice 2) Press Ctrl+P 3) Type in the number of copies. Opening LibreOffice/MS Office can be brutally slow on older machines.

Or 1)Open terminal. 2) for i in quiz*.doc;do lp -n 15 $i;done. Now not many people would know how to do that and need to have the GUI to guide them. But for those of us who do know, not having the option of using a command line (especially for remote connections!) is dreadful. Why do I have to have so many GUIs, wizards, pop-ups, tips of the day, and other nonsense between me and the code that will send my stuff to the printer?

And that is really the crux of the problem for me. It's not that the command line is better or the GUI is better. They each have their pros and cons. The problem is MS has crap command-line support, so when something is better done via command-line the option isn't there.

MS is just adding insult to injury with their command line trickery comment. They claim the Win8 is better because you can mount ISOs from the GUI while on Linux you have to use the command line. Okay that is fair, but what about all of the windows versions currently available? You know, the ones where you just can't do it at all, command line or not?

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1)

JohnnyMindcrime (2487092) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998699)

Oh, I see... so, in other words, you emerged from your mother's womb with a gene-given instinct to be able to sit in front of a Windows PC and start using it, did you?

Why do you "GUI is the only way" people seem to forget that your ability to use a computer well has a) been learnt over a period of time and, b) entirely down to what you are familiar with?

I am sat here at home currently and I have two PCs running Linux and one running Windows. On the Linux PCs I have scripts and tools running that do batch jobs, backup jobs, mass file renames, automated Usenet searches and downloads. etc. etc. that if I *CAN* do them on Windows would take 10 times the amount of time to set up with a mouse and GUI.

On my Windows PC, I have tools that I love like Tag&Rename, Media Monkey, IrfanView and a few others that let me do stuff with media and graphics files that would take me a while to work out how to do on Linux.

Fortunately, I have stuff like SAMBA running so I can access files in either environment and work on them using the best tool in either OS that, for me, does the job I want to do best.

Not all of us are command line zealots... if you don't like the command line then, please, go do it a way that's better for you - but don't diss what you clearly don't understand because find a repetitive task in a GUI and I can usually work out a command-line way of automating it, and with the time I save drink beer and be a lot happier than you clearly are.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998743)

I actually agree that having to know about -o loop is kind of arcane, but the rest of it isn't. If you know what the OS is doing, at a 10,000 foot level, that whole command makes perfect sense.

This idea that checkbuttons buried under 5 levels of GUI being less arcane than command lines is getting more and more nonsensical as the amount of configuration expands.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (2)

Jorl17 (1716772) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998831)

Like many have pointed out, if you get used to it and know it, it's intuitive. As an analogy, I have a friend who grew up with Linux, so whenever he reached Windows he had the same criticism, because he had to memorize all the clicks here and there, besides interpreting the arcane translations and dubious time estimates, etc, etc, etc.
Furthermore, even though they are "3rd party", many simple applications do that with ease and without having to be tied up to a crappy monopolist OS.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (2)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998325)

hm I just right click and tell it mount

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (4, Informative)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998359)

I don't even do that. I just double click it.

It sounds like someone needs to update their FUD playbook. They're at least 5 years behind the times.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1)

psychobudgie (1416459) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998461)

Or even a single click in Nautilus. Heck, I can mount an ISO with a double click.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (2, Funny)

localman57 (1340533) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998601)

Heck, I can mount an ISO with a double click.

Can somebody please tell me what ISO stands for? Everbody in in this thread keeps saying "I mounted this ISO...I mounted that ISO." I finally found out what you guys mean by "Mounting a MILF", and now you come up with some other mess of letters.

"ISO is taken from the ISO 9660 file system" (4, Informative)

MisterSquid (231834) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998719)

Can somebody please tell me what ISO stands for?

The name ISO is taken from the ISO 9660 file system [wikipedia.org] used with CD-ROM media, but what is known as an ISO image might also contain a UDF (ISO/IEC 13346) file system or a DVD or Blu-ray Disc (BD) image.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (3)

tscheez (71929) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998383)

What? I can mount an ISO in F14 and GNOME with a right click. How is that not easy?

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (2)

gparent (1242548) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998395)

Compare this to Right-Click -> Mount. Which is also available on some distros of Linux depending on DE and such.

No, two lines of fucking arcane bullshit isn't ease of use. It's nerdy crap.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1)

miknix (1047580) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998661)

Compare this to Right-Click -> Mount. Which is also available on some distros of Linux depending on DE and such.

No, two lines of fucking arcane bullshit isn't ease of use. It's nerdy crap.

It is not arcane or nerdy crap, it serves the purpose. Suppose you need to mount a iso file in a remote computer, which solution do you think its better?
1) Use VNC (or X11 over SSH) to display your (Gnome/KDE/...) desktop and use the file browser to browse into the file and then right click it->mount?
2) ssh into the remote host, type su, type "cd /path/to/file/dir; mkdir -p /mnt/iso; mount -o loop file.iso /mnt/iso" ?
now good luck using solution 1 in a public place with low bandwidth...

The conclusion you should draw from here is that GUI is not better than CLI, and vice-versa. Both have their use cases and if you want to be proficient you should use BOTH.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1)

tragedy (27079) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998717)

Well, the first line isn't even necessary if you've done it before, so only one line of "nerdy crap" is actually needed. If you have a terminal open and don't have some sort of crippling hand injury it's faster than the right-click option (although probably not faster than the double click option). Frankly, most of the time I use the mouse to do it these days unless I have to use a terminal (for example ssh'd into a remote box), but that doesn't lead me to deride it as "nerdy crap".

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (4, Insightful)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998479)

mkdir -p /mnt/iso
mount -o loop image.iso /mnt/iso

You kind of proved the author's point right there.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998785)

I kind of wonder if he was trolling, though. 'mkdir blahblah' isn't strictly necessary, so long as you have an empty directory handy (the '-p' flag shouldn't be necessary in any case). The '-o loop' part should also be unnecessary; mount is usually pretty good about figuring that stuff out on its own these days. I just do "sudo mount foo.iso bar" and it works just fine.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1)

gradinaruvasile (2438470) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998509)

Actually i think gnome/nautilus has a right-click option for that or something similar. Also, no root access required if you use fuseiso. This fuseiso thingie can be used with thunar too (ex. "fuseiso -p %n ./contents-of-%n" as a custom right click option).

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (-1, Troll)

Khashishi (775369) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998527)

Linux requires root for too many things. You shouldn't need root to mount a file/device. Only read (and optionally write) permissions on the file/device.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (5, Informative)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998599)

Linux requires root for too many things. You shouldn't need root to mount a file/device.

So you're saying I should be able to plug in a USB stick with a setuid root shell on it, mount that without root permissions, and own your system with almost zero effort?

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1, Informative)

mapfortu (2567463) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998755)

That is exactly the problem with the CD mounting issue. From floppy drives to CD drives there's this problem of "autodetect" and "autorun". People do not know, or do not enjoy admitting it, but there are many possible exploits. Relevant exploits rely on hardware/bus/kernel combinations associated with "autodetect" and "autorun" of media in addition to the manufacturer of the media and the software used to format, create filesystems, and manage data on the media. Copy protection in the 5 1/4" days often relied on the manufacturer knowing more (often unpublished idiosyncratic circuitry details) about the sector/track/fs format in conjunction with chipset of the media drive and the data path across the bus, to the running kernel, and into allotted memory storage.

Linux command line tools somewhat encourage the user to be aware of the vectors for autodetect and autorun exploits. Linux GUI desktop managers dumb down the issue. Windows, in the effort to appeal to a population which didn't know the difference, progressively buried the concepts of autodetect and autorun into deeper and deeper layers of OS and driver configuration.

In all seriousness you are safe to fully expect that every single removable media, in some way, plays a part in a Big Brother (industry _and_ government) tracking and phone-home system.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998775)

If you have physical access, security is long gone.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1)

RCL (891376) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998805)

We can either a) make all user mounts noexec by default b) get rid of setuid c) mix those two approaches by making user mounts executable, but ignoring dangerous flags.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (4, Interesting)

hawguy (1600213) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998623)

Linux requires root for too many things. You shouldn't need root to mount a file/device. Only read (and optionally write) permissions on the file/device.

In my linux desktop, my CD-ROM and USB devices automount when I plug them in, no root required, I don't even need to run a command, they just mount. And I can unmount them by clicking through my file manager. I can mount an ISO by right-clicking on it in my file manager. No root required.

What mounts do you need root for? If it's something you need to do more than once, add it to fstab and add the "user" option.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1)

s.petry (762400) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998655)

Microsofties are always so funny. Did you learn nothing from your MSCE training? Good lord it's at least 100 multiple guess questions that costs over $ 1,000.00 (guaranteed at most locations) to pass.

Before I get there, you can change the control in Linux to allow users to mount any thing from USB drives, to old DOS file systems. It's rather simple, though you won't find a GUI to make the change for you. Want a user to blow everything up? You can do that!

Now to the point of why it's not a default in Linux. Even a Microsoft person should know that portable media is the easiest way of bringing malicious software on to your network, and it's second in use for exploits only to email (where Microsoft has done an exceptional job of auto-executing various file types without user knowledge.. hence thousands and thousands of exploits).

In Microsoft land, you can change the policy to match Linux. It's a backward mentality though from those of us that realize that "user convenience" and "safety" often collide and sometimes the default should be "security".

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1)

lagartoflojo (998588) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998749)

On my PC running Fedora 16 & Gnome 3:

1. Open the directory where the ISO file is.
2. Double click it.
3. ISO is mounted.

No root required.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1)

ewanm89 (1052822) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998761)

And write permissions the mount point, in his case he does because he creates a new mount point in /mnt and /mnt is writable only by root as a such he needs root for that step, and as he doesn't change those permissions he then needs it to mount the image. But yeah, any user would know root alone is not what is needed for mount.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998537)

The Microsoft twist: No Linux distro does ISO mounting as easily as Windows 8, as it requires some command line trickery (or, again, third-party tools).

Errrr... I opened dolphin (KDE file manager), clicked on a .iso file, and I was readily browsing it....

Blatant troll detected

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998663)

Being able to browse the contents of the .iso is not the same thing as mounting it; try to e.g. start an installation program from there when you've opened it in Dolphin and you'll quickly see why.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1)

tscheez (71929) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998779)

But why would you want to do that? That's not usually how any software is distributed for Linux. Honestly, I can't think of the last time I had to mount an ISO for anything other than grabbing some .exe or .msi file to install on a windows instance somewhere. But that was quickly replaced with VMware's mount ISO option.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1)

galanom (1021665) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998603)

Don't get it.
At linux you use k3b or some other burning application.
At Windows you need to download non-free Daemon tools

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (1)

smudj (1983234) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998693)

Right, there is ONLY DaemonTools, nothing free at all oh, what about Virtual Clone Drive? MagicDisk? ISODisk? I haven't paid for an ISO mount tool for Windows yet.

Re:"Linux Command Line Tirckery" HA! (2)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998617)

That's really a horrible example, though.

If Win 8 can handle ISO images half as simply as WinCDEmu (Open source, too), then it's kicking Linux's ass in that regard. Double-Click on ISO, mounted. Right Click->Eject, unmounted.

Tilting at this particular windmill might not have been the best illustration.

[0]which I won't be updating to, so fanboy accusations to /dev/null

Oh, really? (0)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998651)

That simple huh?

mount: Could not find any loop device.

No (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998221)

Haven't tried windows 8 but since it is windows it is just safe to assume.

Common sense (2)

HalAtWork (926717) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998227)

That goes for anything, but a more mature implementation will be more robust and so will the applications that support that implementation.

Linux *Implemented* It First (5, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998241)

As details about new features in Windows 8 started to be discussed in the Building 8 blog and bandied about in Linux/Windows forums, Linux users were quick to chime in with a hearty 'Linux had that first' — even for things that were just a natural evolution, like native support for USB 3.0.

Perhaps they're not jeering Windows for "copying" Linux so much as they are happy to show that the flexibility and community involvement in open source is starting to surpass those closed source equivalents? Isn't that what Windows used to gain so much marketshare? Supporting everything before everyone else?

Re:Linux *Implemented* It First (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998381)

So Win7 doesn't have "native USB 3.0" support?

That kind of sucks. Although it's not unprecedented.

Microsoft needs to find some way to artificially drive demand for new versions of Windows.

Re:Linux *Implemented* It First (4, Interesting)

Dahamma (304068) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998531)

USB 3.0 works fine with Windows 7, you just have to install the drivers provided by the mobo/card manufacturer. Big deal...

The real question is... (5, Insightful)

pwolf (1016201) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998243)

Does it really matter?

A better question may be (3, Insightful)

marcosdumay (620877) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998411)

And what will Linux do that Windows 8 doesn't when Win8 finally gets on the market?

Or maybe:

When will people start to care about paying for low quality products when hight quality ones are free?

Re:A better question may be (3, Insightful)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998451)

When the producer of the low quality product has coerced the hardware vendors into making it exceedingly hard, if not impossible, to install the high quality one.

Re:A better question may be (2)

michrech (468134) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998525)

When will people start to care about paying for low quality products when hight quality ones are free?

'People', like me, will start to care when the software we run (for me it's games) run *natively* under the freely available operating systems.

THAT is one of the biggest issues preventing 'people' from migrating to Linux.

Re:A better question may be (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998751)

THAT is one of the biggest issues preventing 'people' from migrating to Linux.

Yeah, the people who think they must have WhizzyWriter 2000 on their PC and couldn't possibly use the open source equivalent...

Of course it won't run on Windows 8 for ARM either, or in the glorious future Metosexual interface on x86.

Re:A better question may be (1)

LoudNoiseElitist (1016584) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998645)

"When will people start to care about paying for low quality products when hight quality ones are free?"

I'm not really sure you've used Windows recently. Windows 7 is a hell of a lot more stable and usable on random hardware than some of the distros I've tried recently (namely Ubuntu and Fedora, although I blame Unity and Gnome 3). Not to mention I can run everything I need to get my work done out of the box with very little hassle.

Look, I wish I could use Linux as my primary OS. I really do. Most of my work is done in a MinGW Bash shell. I use Git. I'd prefer to be using Linux. But at the end of the day, I have deadlines. And those deadlines don't give me time to screw with shit to get it working as smoothly as it does in Windows.

Meh. (5, Informative)

zooblethorpe (686757) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998245)

I don't really see anything here worth the attention -- this really just looks like an attempt to generate traffic.

Move along, nothing to see here.

...No, really. It's quite dull and profoundly uncontroversial.

So ask not '[D]oes Windows 8 do it better?', but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998259)

'who cares about Windows'?

Linux works for me, and Microsoft is irrelevant.
I really like the way things have turned out.

ISO Mounting (5, Funny)

Monkey Angst (577685) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998279)

ISO Mounting

It boggled my mind that even Windows 7 didn't have that. At my job, I'm the Mac tech and there are a couple of PC techs. When they're overbusy, I take some of their workload... had to do an install of Office on someone's machine, so I found a folder of ISOs on a network share, downloaded it, and...? Hmm. "I may be an idiot," I said to my colleagues, "but I can't figure out how to mount this ISO file." "Burn it," they said. "Why, how do you open it on a Mac?" "Uh... you double-click it."

Talk about your long times coming.

Re:ISO Mounting (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998349)

Go ahead and double click on your iso with your 1 button mouse.

Re:ISO Mounting (2)

spire3661 (1038968) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998403)

Your comment obviously means you have never used a Magic Mouse on Lion.

Re:ISO Mounting (1)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998499)

Or... plug which ever mouse you want into your Mac. But then perhaps the intricacies of the USB connection are beyond your comprehension.

Re:ISO Mounting (1)

localman57 (1340533) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998807)

perhaps the intricacies of the USB connection are beyond your comprehension.

You'd be surprised...

I often have to try two or three times to get a USB connector into my laptop; either it's upside down or I'm pushing it at a bad angle and it just won't go in.

Source: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2173728&cid=36195154 [slashdot.org]

Re:ISO Mounting (1)

AGMW (594303) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998571)

Go ahead and double click on your iso with your 1 button mouse.

Back in the dim and distant past when I last used windows ("XP" I think it was called?) I seem to recall a Double Click entailed clicking one button twice. Don't tell me they subsequently changed that to one click from each button!

Re:ISO Mounting (1)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998625)

You used the wrong joke fool. The correct reply was something to do with dragging the ISO to the recycle bin, or whatever it's called on the mac.

Re:ISO Mounting (1)

hawguy (1600213) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998647)

Go ahead and double click on your iso with your 1 button mouse.

What's difficult about double-clicking with a one-button mouse? Even on my 7 button mouse, when I double click I use only one button at a time.

Re:ISO Mounting (1)

sohmc (595388) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998385)

I like to say that I literally 'LOL'ed at this. I've said the same thing a number of times about things that are so easy either on a Mac or on Linux that is impossible to do natively on Windows.

Will Windows 8 have virtual desktops? Seriously...this needs to native to Windows.

Re:ISO Mounting (1)

emurphy42 (631808) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998575)

Not that you're necessarily wrong, but VirtuaWin works well and has for a while. Add the KvasdoPager plug-in to get a preview widget within the taskbar.

Re:Virtual desktops (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998597)

Windows has had virtual desktops for a long, long time.

It's part of the SysInternals suite, free download from Microsoft.

Re:ISO Mounting (1)

Meeni (1815694) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998607)

Conversely mosaic window positioning from windows 7 needs to be stolen in mac and linux.

Re:ISO Mounting (5, Insightful)

Korin43 (881732) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998777)

The one that really gets me is updating.

On Windows:
    * Run Windows Update
    * Run a program that detects out-of-date software like FileHippo's update checker (or open all of your programs and see which ones annoy you)
    * Download each program's update individually
    * Run each of those (clicking through the damn wizard every time)
    * Reboot your machine
    * Watch as a "new update available" popup appears an hour later when you open a program

On Linux, pick one of the following:
    * Click the update icon (Ubuntu, maybe other distros)
    * Run 'yum upgrade', 'aptitude update && aptitude upgrade' or 'pacman -Syu'

"OMG Linux is so hard. You expect me to open a terminal and type two words??! It's much easier to spend an hour clicking 'Yes"!"

Re:ISO Mounting (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998449)

I support both Macs and PCs and I love the ISO mount feature. I never saw why Windows XP or Vista or 7 didn't include it -- until I stepped into the license administration role.
I hate the ISO install feature. This is a corporate nightmare.
"Hey, I need such-and-such software"
"Here's the ISO. Just install it. The tech gave me the license."
Then I get to come around and uninstall all the users' precious software because they don't have a license.
HP's Radia works just fine, thank you.

Re:ISO Mounting (1)

hawguy (1600213) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998675)

I support both Macs and PCs and I love the ISO mount feature. I never saw why Windows XP or Vista or 7 didn't include it -- until I stepped into the license administration role.
I hate the ISO install feature. This is a corporate nightmare.
"Hey, I need such-and-such software"
"Here's the ISO. Just install it. The tech gave me the license."
Then I get to come around and uninstall all the users' precious software because they don't have a license.
HP's Radia works just fine, thank you.

Why does ISO mounting make things any different.? Instead of saying "Here's the ISO. Just install it. The tech gave me the license", it becomes "Here's the ISO, burn it and install it". Or "Here's the CD-ROM, just install it".

Re:ISO Mounting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998477)

ISO mounting and DVD burning were things that took a strangely long time to appear in Windows. I would drive me nuts moving from a Linux desktop to Windows environment, trying to find equivalent tools for handling discs. Or installing drivers or getting updates for non-OS software. There are some things Windows does very well, but a lot of admin tasks are so much easier on Linux.

Re:ISO Mounting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998545)

Virtual Clone Drive has always worked fine for me.

Re:ISO Mounting (1)

LoudNoiseElitist (1016584) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998685)

This.

I get that it's nice to have it built into the system, but a lot of you guys are acting like it's just not available on Windows. It has been for a very, very long time thanks to third-party tools.

Not an unbiased comparison (1)

lwriemen (763666) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998301)

Just look at the author's bio. Free advertising/advocacy has been going on in the computer magazines for as long as I can remember.

"things that were just a natural evolution" (3, Insightful)

G3ckoG33k (647276) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998321)

"things that were just a natural evolution"

Try to tell that to the patent jerks at Apple, and Microsoft...

Maybe someone like SCO will sue Microsoft for using the the USB protocol, even if Microsoft and Apple may have paid for using USB, and SCO doesn't even own the patents. This business is so litigious.

WinGnomeShell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998333)

I was working with a W8 for a startup with the same feats and a gui like it (not a metro app) and all if have to say W8 is shitty fail copy of Gnome Shell.

Original Windows features (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998437)

Find a feature of Windows that doesn't have its origin in some other OS. Xerox Star, Mac OS, OS/2, NextStep, Linux...just try.

About the only one is the Ribbon.

(Also the Windows XP search doggie.)

Re:Original Windows features (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998551)

BSoD?

For some values of "Better" (1)

Medievalist (16032) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998447)

It's noticeably better at generating profit for Microsoft.

Guesswork (0)

millwall (622730) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998463)

Let's just say that Microsoft didn't do anything from scratch. While I did not dive deep into the file system drivers, I suspect that Microsoft looked very hard at some of the principles that worked years ago in both ZFS and then Btrfs and got the "inspiration" to develop something very similar.

So why didn't you?

Because you can't?

So you're just guessing? Impressive!

Ask Not (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998469)

Ask Not What Your Windows Can Do For You, Ask What Your Linux Can Do For Windows!

ReFS... (1)

magamiako1 (1026318) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998495)

ZFS is a fantastic filesystem, most people who have used it are aware of it--but it has little widespread adoption outside of the Solaris and BSD communities due to licensing.

BTRFS has yet to become the defacto file system in any linux distro today that I'm aware of, but it's well under way. That said, BTRFS will be a complete replacement for ext4, while ReFS is being phased in with a cautious approach (no system drives on ReFS).

The filesystem thing is definitely a natural evolution, it's like saying features of ZFS were copied into BTRFS--of course they were--ZFS isn't widely adopted in the Linux world. Just like BTRFS won't be adopted in the Microsoft World.

I'd love to see some performance numbers between the two, but I suspect ReFS will be a "try it and see how it works" thing first. I suspect it will do wonders for Home Servers, and I can't wait!

Re:ReFS... (1)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998633)

BTRFS has yet to become the defacto file system in any linux distro today that I'm aware of, but it's well under way. That said, BTRFS will be a complete replacement for ext4, while ReFS is being phased in with a cautious approach (no system drives on ReFS).

I read somewhere that BTRFS would become the default on Fedora if there existed a stable, useable fsck-utility for it; as it is now if your BTRFS system becomes corrupted and doing full re-balancing of it doesn't fix the corruption, then there's quite little you can do about it. That is not to say BTRFS is unstable or anything, they're just playing their cards safe in waiting for such a utility to become available before making BTRFS the default FS.

That said, I've been using BTRFS for about a year now and I'm quite happy with it. There is one niggle that I am not too happy about, but I believe that it'll be rectified sometime in the future if I just can manage to wait for it. The niggle is that I have compression enabled on the filesystem and sometimes BTRFS reports that there's hundreds of gigabytes free space left, but when I'm trying to write there I get disk full errors; it is fixable by doing complete re-balancing of the whole filesystem, but with 5 terabytes of disk space it takes god damn forever.

Re:ReFS... (1)

magamiako1 (1026318) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998769)

I've been following the news on this stuff reasonably closely. I've been a big fan of ZFS for years and it's a shame that it never really made it outside of its IP-walled garden, as it could have become the defacto filesystem for Linux a long time ago.

Nice note on btrfs, no fsck for it sucks :( Hopefully they fix that soon, which I'm sure they will.

Even the designer of ext4 has gotten behind btrfs and says it is the future.

Now begs the question, do you say "B T R F S?" or "BTree FS?" or "Butter FS"?

Immitation/Flattery (4, Interesting)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998513)

I would have thought Linux users would be happy if MS borrowed their ideas- it makes the "mainstream" operating system more like the one they have chosen to use for themselves.

Surely MS copying Linux can only be a good thing? No?

I've heard MS is going to even start using a penguin as their logo too. ;)

Re:Immitation/Flattery (0)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998637)

Consider that GNOME, KDE, and several other IDE/Window managers took their look and feel directly from Windows.

Re:Immitation/Flattery (1)

Korin43 (881732) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998843)

I'm pretty happy about it. If Microsoft's package manager works reasonably well, then Windows will become significantly less painful to use. Unfortunately, it not clear if it will be useful in the general case, or if it's just going to be a slightly larger Windows Update + Gimmicky Toys.

Compare after the Patent report (0, Flamebait)

s.petry (762400) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998517)

Really, that's what is going to matter. M$ always does things their way, and to a Microsoftie they will always think it's the best. The problem with Microsoft is, and has been for a very long time, that they not only believe that they invented everything but also submit patent requests for everything. Of course with the mess that is our patent system, it's a challenge to get them revoked (Thank the BitLords for the Open Source Patent fighting squads!).

What bugs me is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38998659)

... the fact that Microsoft can take good ideas from the open source community, and it's fine. But when the open source community does something remotely like Microsoft, the lawyers come out, and someone using that open source software ends up paying Microsoft royalties.

Seriously, I hope this doesn't turn into tablet manufacturers paying royalties for using free software that looks like Windows 8, which got some of it's look from free software.

Unity? That Looks Like Metro! Pause-able file operations? We do that! Pay Up!

Open source advocates react to the hubris (1)

daboochmeister (914039) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998783)

Most of the people who react to MS's "borrowing" of ideas have no issue whatsoever with MS using the ideas ... it's the way that MS portrays itself as the epitome of innovation, as if it invented the ideas. The level of hubris it takes to create the various MS marketing campaigns inflicted on us over the years is ... staggering.

In my experience, on a one-on-one basis, most of the technical staff at MS don't display this attitude (most - i've met a couple of exceptions). But as a corporate whole, the level of disingenuousness is ... well, repulsive, and arguably unethical.

Wrong Question (2)

Malibee (1215790) | more than 2 years ago | (#38998797)

There's no question that companies like Microsoft borrow good ideas from F/OSS, and often improve upon them. This is not a bad thing in and of itself: borrowing good ideas is a central tenant of F/OSS. The important question is, how much of the improved idea does Microsoft let F/OSS borrow back? For example, will the Gnome project get sued if they incorporated elements of Windows 8's file copy dialog into Nautilus?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>