But yea, I do have some Logitech mice, and while one very small one works very well so far, another one (that was pretty cheap at the time I bought it, to be fair) actually has major issues - it seems that some of its contacts are failing, as Linux sometimes unloads the mouse to protect it from frying something, and its middle mouse button now either doesn't work, or if it does work, it gets pressed multiple times instead of one. I also have a Logitech microphone, but so far it's been working really well. Overall I'd say that you get what you pay for, Logitech or not.
Microsoft does so much harm to the entire world that the sooner we get rid of it, the better. They lie, cheat, steal, destroy, oppress, they use every dirty trick in the book and invent new ones just to keep users enslaved under their products, just to squeeze as much profit as they can from their users. They hate user freedom, they riddle everything with ads and DRM, because they're basically in bed with the copyright mafia, RIAA, MPAA and brothers. Together with Apple and the copyright mafia, they form an unholy alliance, which seeks to act as gatekeepers to the market, to prevent actual new innovators from disrupting the market and ending their unfair market dominance. They are fighting a losing battle, as history shows, that eventually progress and innovation always wins, and the gatekeepers will lose.
Nope. There's no "Criticism of the phoronix user known as dee." page on Wikipedia. There is a "Criticism of Microsoft" one. I don't do any unethical things microsoft does.If Microsoft are nazis than you are a terrorist and everyone's public enemy no.1.
You don't even have any proof to back up your claims, period. You are just another one of those 'it sucks because its Microsoft' people who only know how to rat on anything without even being able to see the greater picture, and the whole basis of your malice towards Microsoft is really just "they don't give us the source code of that software so that FOSS can use it', which has nothing to do with ethics. 'Ethics' is just a word you throw it to make yourself think that discriminating against powerful closed software puts you in some sort of moral high ground when more than half of the world's software developers and endusers really don't give a crapshoot of whether the tools they use on a daily basis are proprietary or not. The basis of almost all the world's economic activity is built over Microsoft technologies. The driving force of virtually all computing and hardware consumerism is also directly tied to Microsoft. History has tons of examples where new technologies introduced by competitors failed to take off until Microsoft came in with their own implementation. Touchscreen notebooks had no place in a consumer's home until Windows 8 shipped, and now you see people all over asking 'does this notebook as a touch screen' before even finding out more about new computers. And tha is just the consumer side of things. A boy like you will never have seen just how deeply entrenched Microsoft is in the server and enterprise space (hint: their server share is much, much greater than 40% Wikipedia will have you believe). If Microsoft collapses the core computing technology that drives the management of the global economy will freeze overnight and collapse.
Don't give me all that ethical bullshit about monopolies when you can't even accept the fact that Microsoft is capable of making more polished software than the competition. The most ubiquitous RDBMS package in the FOSS world, MySQL, can't even hold a candle to SQL Server if we are to compare them on core functionality alone (an RDBMS that does not even support the full SQL standard and ignores the all important CHECK command? you serious? Even IBM DB2 and Postgres does, damnit). And for the sake of ethics you are insisting that companies stick with an inferior solution just because it is FOSS, because it's so ethical to demand that a business ruin itself by not using the best tools for its business and going with inferior FOSS solutions. What a joke. OpenOffice.org (and now LibreOffice) had YEARS to build up its reputation and challenge MS Office for the desktop office suite, and today we have v4 of Libreoffice that has an interface which looks ripped out of Office 97, can't even grammar check properly, can't format paragraphs properly and can't even SAVE pictures properly. And programming? Vi may be great, but when it comes to IDEs there's nothing the FOSS world can offer that can even remotely come close to Microsoft Visual Studio. Even the latest versions of Eclipse and QtCreator is no where as polished and well-integrated into the respective operating systems that they are installed in as Visual Studio on Windows. Okay, maybe that's an exaggeration: I do have to use Eclipse when I practice on Java or on Android and its a-ok, but if VS will provide support for the Java SDK i'd do my practices in VS anytime. And I WILL admit that the one area Eclipse trashes VS in is its support for external plugins.
"But they are not ethical so we should boycott the best tool for the job and use inferior solutions that will involve massive retraining and migration costs!" is what you will claim. Time to wake up from dreamland, boy. Companies exist to do make money and how they do it is their own business.
You are a disgrace to the world of software. Somebody who has not even written code for others have no right to determine or judge the value or the 'ethicality' of it, regardless of whether the code is open or not.
Last edited by Sonadow; 04-28-2013 at 09:40 AM.
Wow, you both are out there. MS is neither the devil nor the saint. They are not conspirators or mafia, they don't do much of any of those things dee listed. They have made some questionable decisions, yes, but on one hand they had to pay for some of those in lawsuits (the IE situation and so), and on the other hand it's peoples' gullibility or lack of care that get them into such issues to begin with (DreamSpark and so). MS just takes advantage of that, but it's not illegal. On the other hand, those MS products Sonadow holds in such high regard are not that different from the alternatives, and using one or the other comes down to habit or a specific situation. They're not as polished as you'd think, either. So the truth is in the pudding, not in either of the two extremes.
Also if people don't take Linux support in their buying preference, nothing will ever change. There are still blokes buying AMD graphics for linux hoping (sic!) linux support will improve.
BTW, everyone, tell your friends about the driverless webcams!
Some people still believe the lies of AMD and OpenSource support.
Last edited by YAFU; 04-28-2013 at 10:53 AM.
They are still to lazy to create a full featured webcam driver, even as MS market share was down already two years ago to 78%. We probably have to wait a little longer
as they are only discovering the mobile market...
Catalyst is still behind on supporting recent versions of xserver, but Ubuntu generally keeps its xserver packages in sync with the version supported by Catalyst. I believe Catalyst currently supports xserver v1.13, which is currently what Ubuntu 13.04 uses, so Catalyst 'should' work barring any unfortunate incidents.
For Fedora, the best option is to use X -1 version of the distro and stick to it for as long as possible, where X = latest released version. OpenSUSE and Mageia both have longer release durations as well so their xserver versions are typically 1 version below the latest upstream, which should play nice with Catalyst.
I'd go as far to say that if anybody wants to use a dedicated AMD graphics card on Linux with the open drivers, AMD is by far the best bet (barring Southern Islands).
Last edited by Sonadow; 04-28-2013 at 11:09 AM.