Which way to go for linux/comp-systems?

[arctic]

Whether you or I agree on whether or not it's useful to us, the need is there in the real world. We don't have to agree on how useful these things may be -to us-, because what is being discussed is whether or not the need for them exists - and I know for a fact it does.

 

Like xbob points out, you're trying to change the industry to meet your very basic needs, when many others are in need of the power and "bloat" which you denounce as "useless" (IYO, that is).

well, you say that this necessary bloated stuff is necessary. if it is so necessary, then tell me, why hasn't it been necessary for the human race in more than 10000 years?

 

imho, this "need" for bloated stuff is nothing else than a bad reflection of our real needs. we tend to imagine that we need things that we really don't need, but as others might find it useful, we need them too, although we don't see the point in adopting certain things.

 

in other words: if everyone thinks that others think that they have to wear hats because they can't exist without hats, then we too would wear hats because we feel it is necessary, because we want to live... although we really don't need those hats, but we do not see that because we are trapped in some kind of maze. yes, this is somehow philosophical and psychological, but i think, we are becoming the victims of the wrongly produced imagined needs in our minds that are a wrong reflection of other peoples imagined needs.

Edited July 26, 2004 by arctic

[tyme]

well, you say that this necessary bloated stuff is necessary. if it is so necessary, then tell me, why hasn't it been necessary for the human race in more than 10000 years?

in that case, turn off your computer, leave your house, go off into the woods, start a fire, and hunt your food with wooden spears and spearheads shaped from rocks while living in a cave. because, from your point of view, everything except those things is "bloat".

[xbob]

Whether you or I agree on whether or not it's useful to us, the need is there in the real world. We don't have to agree on how useful these things may be -to us-, because what is being discussed is whether or not the need for them exists - and I know for a fact it does.

 

Like xbob points out, you're trying to change the industry to meet your very basic needs, when many others are in need of the power and "bloat" which you denounce as "useless" (IYO, that is).

well, you say that this necessary bloated stuff is necessary. if it is so necessary, then tell me, why hasn't it been necessary for the human race in more than 10000 years?

 

imho, this "need" for bloated stuff is nothing else than a bad reflection of our real needs. we tend to imagine that we need things that we really don't need, but as others might find it useful, we need them too, although we don't see the point in adopting certain things.

 

in other words: if everyone thinks that others think that they have to wear hats because they can't exist without hats, then we too would wear hats because we feel it is necessary, because we want to live... although we really don't need those hats, but we do not see that because we are trapped in some kind of maze. yes, this is somehow philosophical and psychological, but i think, we are becoming the victims of the wrongly produced imagined needs in our minds that are a wrong reflection of other peoples imagined needs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Arctic, seriously, you are starting to sound like a Luddite who has had one too many cups of coffee with a Minimalist. I respect your opinions, but attempting to psycho-analyze the emotional basis for software design/choices is the only maze you are trapped in.

 

Accept the idea that you do have a choice to run minimal GUI stuff on older hardware and accept that many of us enjoy the rich environment and don't mind shelling out for the benefits of new hardware every few years. If you can't see the advances and convenience (and added accessibility) that KDE brings over a green screen or even CDE then I am not sure what to say next. If we take your idea and run with it we should all be back scheduling time on the university VAX.

[arctic]

Arctic, seriously, you are starting to sound like a Luddite who has had one too many cups of coffee with a Minimalist.

errrm... maybe you are right. i had lots of coffee these last days.

 

in that case, turn off your computer, leave your house, go off into the woods, start a fire, and hunt your food with wooden spears and spearheads shaped from rocks while living in a cave. because, from your point of view, everything except those things is "bloat".

okay, i am going out now and walk into the woods. good idea anyway. ;)

Edited July 26, 2004 by arctic

[arshadmomen]

Arctic, seriously, you are starting to sound like a Luddite who has had one too many cups of coffee with a Minimalist.

errrm... maybe you are right. i had lots of coffee these last days.

 

in that case, turn off your computer, leave your house, go off into the woods, start a fire, and hunt your food with wooden spears and spearheads shaped from rocks while living in a cave. because, from your point of view, everything except those things is "bloat".

okay, i am going out now and walk into the woods. good idea anyway. ;)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I thoroughly enjoyed this discussion.

 

Hope to read more such illuminating threads here.

[xbob]

I thoroughly enjoyed this discussion.

 

Hope to read more such illuminating  threads here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's a really nice board and people can take different views without flaming or walking away enemies, that seems to be rare on the Internet these days. Given the chance I would have coffee and discuss Minimalsim with Arctic any day of the week, if he ever comes back from that walk in the woods.

[tyme]

...if he ever comes back from that walk in the woods.

darn it, i was just about to contact my friend yogi to be sure arctic had an "accident" while in the woods :D guess i'll have to let him come back alive....

 

[arctic]

[Darkelve]

...if he ever comes back from that walk in the woods.

darn it, i was just about to contact my friend yogi to be sure arctic had an "accident" while in the woods

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yeah, that Yogi sure is mean :unsure:

 

[xbob]

...if he ever comes back from that walk in the woods.

darn it, i was just about to contact my friend yogi to be sure arctic had an "accident" while in the woods :D guess i'll have to let him come back alive....

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It was a total set up, he sends Arctic out to the woods to set a fire than he drops a dime to Yogi, then he calls Smokey, poor Arctic never had a chance....

 

Hey BooBoo, there's a penguin settin' fires in the woods, gimme' the phone... :D

[theYinYeti]

if we look e.g. at the size of computers today, compared to the 1970's, they are very small, have even smaller data-storage equipment. why didn't get the coding of programs get smaller, too? :unsure:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm a professional programmer, so I thought I'd share my point of view with you on this subject :)

 

Computers indeed become smaller and smaller: I've just bought a 17cmx17cm ITX motherboard with more on it than my whole ATX PC! But if you looked at the "source-code" (that would be drawings describing the electronic connections between most basic components: AND, OR, NAND, ...), then you'd discover that the drawing for the ITX board is much bigger than the drawing for the ATX mb along with its associated PCI cards. What happens is that the technology made it possible to "store" more(/finer) hardware than before, in less room.

 

Software is the same: it does more and more things; there are more and more possibilities. Hence the source code (given a common language for comparison), is bigger (as with the electronic drawings). The difference lies in what is generated from the source code: the binaries. Source-code has always been transformed to the same binary instructions, understandable by the CPU. By simplifying, there's one instruction for test, one instruction for addition, one instruction for branching...

 

So binary-code size depends on the number of CPU instructions that are necessary to do the task. And AFAIK, CPU instructions of x86 CPUs are more or less the same than 15 years ago. Of course, there are newer instructions (MMX, SSE...) that do a lot of things, but those a not the most used by far, and on the other hand, current trend is to make less simpler instructions (RISC CPUs) that execute faster, which results in bigger binary-code, that runs faster.

 

Luckily for us, programmers don't have to work on the binary-code. To compensate for the growing size of source-code (if you keep using the same language), programmers regularly change their language of choice, to a language that requires less coding. OO programming is one way to manage code more easily (python, Java). Another solution is to make the source-code smaller by making more and more of it implicit (using a toolkit or a framework) or auto-generated. The future of programming may lie in languages like XUL or Entity.

 

---------

 

Now on your first question: I think that Linux's strength is that it can be as much eye-candy or bare-simple as you want. It depends on your level of computing, and on your needs. IMO, GNU/Linux (in general, not just the kernel) is going in the right direction by fullfilling almost all the wishes of desktop users, but at the same time keeping the solid fundation for a solid and simple OS.

 

But one shouldn't consider that all is won. And just because new technologies make things slower don't mean they are bad. Files-management in particular needs a lot of reworking, now that we have more and more files. Sooner or later, files will have to be managed database-like. It will be slower, but necessary:

- When you store mails, should you make directories per sender, per recipient, per project, per status, ...? The answer should be NONE! The mail should be accessible through all criterias, using virtual folders, each corresponding to a query (eg: sender=me@my.pc). That is something that already exists, eg. in Evolution, made possible by the fact that a mail carries its own metadata (the headers).

- When you store songs, should you make subdirectories by artist, by title, by category, by genre, ...? Here again, the answer should be none. The song should be found using either (or several) criterias. And here again, this is already possible with MP3, because MP3 files carry their own metadata (tags).

The problem is that this kind of virtual-folders should be the default for any file anywhere on the file-system (which in Unix includes the network), at the OS/filesystem-level.

 

Linux is in the good track, but we must not forget innovation. These days, I've discovered GoboLinux, and I'm very interested by the way they ponder on what could be done with the Linux filesystem, and I've found that many user comments in related articles are also interesting.

 

Yves.

[Gowator]

Ive got a few comments on the minimalism approach...

What strikes me is that the choice isnt so big as we would like.

 

My near perfect Word Processor was possibly word 2.0 or early WP for Windows.

Forget all the printing stuff extra drivers and fonts just the functionality and nothing useful has been added since then.

 

I used to think the save as html was a useful feature till I looked at the code it makes ... etc. etc.

 

There is practically nothing in word whatever version now that wasnt in Word2.0 that is genuinely useful anyway....

 

However there is a fundamental difference between windows programming and linux programming.

In Windows, unless you are MS you dont have the OS source or the source of the associated helper apps. Thus stuff tends to be built a a montlithic programme.

Libraries are hardly shared unless one programme manufacturer impliments this for their own apps (say Adobe) whereas this is common place in Linux.

 

In fact its more than common place it is the basis of linux.

 

Just because Arctic was taking to much coffee doesnt mean the fundamental message is wrong. There are places to add features and places to add eye-kandy but we should be plain about what we are adding...and plain about the choices

 

 

Personally I find K3B a great tool.

But CdRecord is a more basic tool .... not to mention various other programs etc.

K3B is feature rich but it reuses the features of other progs's in that it is really a set of front ends. (the RPM is only a few hundred kb)

 

Thats not better or worse than cdrecord or lame its just a different level of SW.

 

I think its incredibly important that we can still use cdrecord from the CLI and from other programs. This is the basis of GPL SW.... IMHO.

 

OpenOffice is a bit opposite. It is a huge suite that doesnt provide anything to anything else. It even has its own printing etc. very much in the old Windows style for nono MS progs like wordperfect etc.

 

I dont like this.... as a trend

Becuase its not modular, I cant just take the part I want and that worries me its to an extent working against preexisting stuff and its not contributiing in a global sense.

 

I dont think this is a good trend for linux in general....

I think Arctic has a very good point over need and want and English is just about the only language I know where need is a verb!

Latin languages you have_need_of ...

 

for the basis of this discussion i think that is a good seperation....

Do I have need of x,y,z is nbot the same as do I want x,y,z

To seperate need and want is the basis of greed.

Do I need a new Mercedes SLK ? is not the same as Do I want or even perceive a need of one.

 

we make or own addictions because addiction is simply us confusing needs and wants. My room mate would rather not eat than go without Star Treck, I used to think I needed cigarettes... we dont need any of these things BUT a lot of money and advertising is spent to make sure we confuse need and want.

 

This is not to say we have not moved forwards...in civilisation.

The wheel is ever popular. I guess ultimately the wheel is about transportation?

The telephone simplified lives, the cell phone, the computer.

 

All of these are decent inventions ... but do i want my cellphone to have polyphonic ring tones and built in camera?

 

At which point do these add-ons become not only pointless but a liability.

 

Microsoft has spent a fortune on adding the bells and whistles... and more importantly convincing YOU that you need them. Even while clippy is annoying us we perceive some need for help.... except we knew how to do this in version X-1 and the present version has added nothing.

 

Thus its merging the bloat and the 'perceived need' that is the trap.

 

Think back to word 2.0 or word perfect in 1995. What didn't they do you need today?

 

This is a very serious question....

All the basics were there. I have copies of my CV from 1995 and the basic layout hasn't changed .... yet I create a relatively simple document in word XP and try and saveas word 2.0 and it will tell me it will loose features.

 

How can this be. I managed to get it the same looking yet it says hey this cant be done with Word 2.0, even though I know it can.

 

The way to advance in Linux is through genuine new stuff or reworking and reusing older stuff. Abiword/OpenOffice are not new stuff but Abiword at least reuses Gtk. Linux is inherently modular and good_linux_programs are designed with this in mind.

 

KDE is not bloat by this definition because it contains reusable components...

Im still in the so my system can run KDE so I run it camp but I think we should all watch our potential addictions! So long as we say hey I want this eye kandy thats fine but when we feel we need it then something has gone wrong!

[arctic]

1)

The mail should be accessible through all criterias, using virtual folders, each corresponding to a query (eg: sender=me@my.pc). That is something that already exists, eg. in Evolution, made possible by the fact that a mail carries its own metadata (the headers).

... i must admit: this sounds interesting. didn't know that evolution used such thing.

 

2) @gowator: thanx. at least one person on my side. will you come to the woods? i have a nice fire with some beans&bacon plus coffee. :D

Edited July 27, 2004 by arctic

[Gowator]

Dude, till tyme gets rich and buys an island i'm livin in the woods...

 

But the point is bloat is fine so long as we recognise it as bloat and not necassary....

 

In Linux we get to chopose our bloat level, sure lots of KDE is bloat but I have spare CPU cycles !!

 

......but if I run out like I do on the laptop I am free to use more lightweight WM....

 

that to me is the choice in linux but at the same tiome its getting hard to find <1.4MB kernels

linux should look to the future but equally respect its root(s) ;D

[tyme]

Dude, till tyme gets rich and buys an island i'm livin in the woods...

:lol: :lol:

i'm surprised someone still remembers that!