That's not the full installation guide, it's a summary. The thorough in-depth guide is the Beginners' Guide, the other one is for people who have already installed Arch and just want a quick reference (as explained on the main page). There's no bug report for any issues with the install media in VirtualBox, so it must work fine (for you too, otherwise you would have reported it - right? :P).
Originally Posted by grotgrot
Last edited by strcat; 03-05-2013 at 08:27 AM.
wayland and weston are already released and at version 1.0.5.
Originally Posted by BO$$
Also wayland and weston are in the official archlinux repos. They also enabled the gtk wayland backend in archlinux.
They are still waiting for an official qt5-qtwayland release to also enable qt5 support on wayland.
Why? My prediction has been proofed to be right
Originally Posted by Sverro2
... and Mac will move to use iOS, or start to use FreeBSD?
Originally Posted by Pawlerson
I can't see how this would happen.
Never forget workstation users. If someone did, he/she will be missing in the so-called "Post-PC" age.
Apple clearly knows about this while MS seems not.
A15 beats atom perfectly on power consumption.
Originally Posted by BO$$
Nice shoot ARM! Please continue like this and you can compete with Xeon in your next architecture.
Why would intel want to move in to the mobile space when the markets they already dominate are way more profitable for them? Why compete with all of the 3 dozen ARM manufacturers for selling $5 mobile SoCs when they can sell $2000 server CPUs with pretty much no disruption? The competition on the ARM market is good for the end user, but it's not good for a chip maker that is used to running a de-facto monopoly.
Originally Posted by BO$$
Even on the desktop intel still has no real competition, apart from AMD which they can keep in line because AMD uses intel's arch. This will likely stay this way at least until ARMv8. (neat trivia: there are already 64-bit ARMv8 CPUs on the market, but only for servers and only one manufacturer makes them).
So, my dear Shuttleworth fanboi, intel has nothing to be desperate about (for now). And they sure as hell have more money and resources than Canonical.
The NIH cartel has spoken.
It is always the same story isn't it. Whenever anyone else makes more noise than the usual suspects, they have to be pounced. One could cynically call them the NIH cartel. They have the sole monopoly on NIHing anything, and are the only ones allowed to make big statements and make noise, and big promises they cannot hold. All others will be silenced and eliminated
...and it couldn't end without Poettering being a douche bag, taking a shit unto one of the greatest space constructions ever made just for having the same name: calling it a "space toilet" and implying, that deorbiting it into ocean somehow were a failure (someone, please, tell that dipshit, that this is what's always done to obsolete Earth-orbiting devices).
If Microsoft makes Cinnamon like desktop, and introduces new, intuitive, easy and automated ways to install apps (ms store or some more convenient way to install like simply dragging in and out of /Applications like on OSX) they would probably win. Heck, even Id go back to windows.
Originally Posted by johnc
But as long as windows experience is garbage Linux Desktop still has a chance. And I support Canonical in their attempt to be kinda like Apple, an enterprise, to partner up with manufacturers of hardware and big software companies. Because that is the only way for Linux Desktop to grow out of just us who are big fans to more people.
Linux Desktop lacks proprietary professional software, which will come with more standardized stack and corporate backing.
Because right now, if you are game developer/gamer, Linux is not for you. If you are professional in audio/video industry, Linux is not for you. If you are ______ professional, relying on professional corporate proprietary software to do your work, Linux is not for you. Don't slap around with Wine! Wine can only do so much. Running VM? Why would you RUN VM on machine, where most of your time you spend in VM itself?
Notice how I am only referring to GNU/Linux for Desktop experience here, which is the most problematic area right now. Server space for instance is clear win for GNU/Linux, Id never ever want to use osx or microsoft crap for that.
RAOF didn't create it, and I wouldn't describe his technical skills or general intellect as approaching idiocy. You can see that I don't like the whole situation, but I wouldn't be abusing any of the developers involved.
Originally Posted by 89c51
Would you elaborate on how this is "destructive"? As far as I can tell, the only one who loses here is RedHat and various proponents of a RedHat-based monoculture. RedHat took advantage of open source software to form the basis of their company, adopting various projects as their own. That enabled Redhat to sell support contracts as the company that lead development of the software, which has been very profitable for them. Now that organizations have decided to do the same, RedHat's supporters are crying foul.
Originally Posted by Hamish Wilson
RedHat should never have published open source software if they expected to dictate how the source code is used. Various BSD people accepted that a long time ago, which is why they make no attempt to dictate how their software is used. On the other hand, Redhat and their supporters seem to have mistaken the GPL as a means to establish their company as the Microsoft of open source, but things do not work that way. RedHat has praised the benefits of open source software for years. Now that others are following suit, it is time to accept that no organization can has exert monopoly control over how open source software is developed and used.
With that said, those that want a monoculture to exist in open source software should establish it through merit and not petty harassment.