Stop Microsoft
Operating Systems => Linux and UNIX => Topic started by: slave on 19 November 2003, 21:19
-
I'll be the first to admit how much I love and use Linux. It's what got me really interested in computers in the first place. The problem is that it's not satisfying to me for only nerds or tech-oriented people to use it. I want everyone to be able to easily use Linux, no matter what their level of technical expertise is. Actually, Linux is very easy - if you are used to its non-intuitive and often archaic configuration systems. Almost any "Linux geek" learned Linux by adapting his mindset to Linux - by thinking like the operating system. I want Linux to be better than that. Computers should adapt to the users - not vice-versa. I want Linux to be for everyone, and I want it to have an interface that anyone can grasp. It should be as easy to use as a Mac. This does not mean I want Linux to become an OS that technical people can't use and love. That is the last thing I want to do. Rather, I would like to see the Linux desktop be easy, intuitive, and simple, while allowing the more technically inclined of us to easily delve into the things we know and love about linux like the shell, configuring via text files, compiling programs, tweaking, installing 6 different browsers, etc. And as I technical user, I appreciate the artistic and intuitive nuances that went into creating OS X. I think it is a myth that all technical users are uninterested in having an intuitive graphical interface. They simply have learned to live without it - the negative side to this is they often expect everyone else to live without it too.
I believe Linux can be made to be the operating system of choice for nontechnical users, but things need to be done in order for that to happen. So I'm going to do something bold and list all the major blockers Linux has that keep it from being used everyday by the bulk of computer users, and I will try to suggest solutions to these problems that are realistic.
Problem #1 - The explosive pace of Linux development makes it difficult for end-users to stay put.
Linux distributions release too often. 2-3 times a year? Give me a break. Most people, unless they are like me and have some sort of obsessive disorder, don't enjoy installing operating systems. We need a Linux distribution that focuses on getting it right instead of simply spontaneously releasing another OS update just because it's been 5 months since the last update. The Debian release model should set a good example. Debian only releases, to quote, "when it's done", which is usually around every two years. This is why Debian has traditionally been one of the most solid operating systems to use in a production environment. If there was a desktop Linux distribution that followed this model, it would allow for more stability and would also allow companies producing software that runs on Linux to more easily assure users that the software will be compatible. It's much easier to handle library dependencies and customer support when your OS releases every 2 years instead of two times a year.
Also, when the OS did release updates, they would be all that more dramatic. ;)
Problem #2 - No easy way to install programs, especially 3rd party programs.
Well, this is a fairly small problem actually, because we have apt-get, which makes managing programs on Linux rather painless, but it has a problem. There are no simplified front-ends to apt-get. Synaptic doesn't count; it's still too complicated for the average man.
What we need is a nice frontend to apt-get and dpkg (I am assuming here that this distribution will be based on Debian) that behaves like installers on Mac or Windows. The question is which one? In Windows you usually are presented with a "Wizard" which guides you through installation of the program using a dialoge-based walkthrough, typically asking you a bunch of questions users shouldn't need to answer, like where do you want it installed and if you want to view the Readme file (like anyone clicks that) I suggest a front-end where users can simply drag a program icon to a "programs" folder and have it install the program automatically, and download the dependencies if needed - although if the package was designed for this distribution then that shouldn't be necessary. This "meta-folder", so to speak, would only contain applications, not libraries and trivial utilities that you see all over the Synaptic menu.
Problem #3 - hardware detection and other issues.
Theoretically, hardware detection on Linux is actually quite good. The little hardware that isn't supported is almost always due to hardware companies being difficult and refusing to release the specs of their chipsets. This, I am confident, will change in the future as Linux becomes more and more important.
I said "theoretically" because most distributions do a half-assed implementation of hardware detection and management. Even the mainstream distros like Fedora don't seem to do it right. For instance the Red hat hardware detector, kudzu, lets you know only on system startup if there is a device added, and comes up with an ugly menu to tell you this, which you have to press a button or it will do nothing. Nobody should have to press a button. That's not what "Plug and Play" is all about. It should be like plugging a Gamecube controller in. This is certainly possible on Linux, and it could be implemented in a superior way than Windows currently does it. In Windows, when you plug in a new device, a crummy bubble notification comes on and alerts you of this. This is intrusive and unnecessary. The ideal thing would be for it to only come up with a window or notification if it saw you plugged in something but it couldn't find the correct drivers for it. This may be the case in the future when more proprietary drivers are made for Linux than are today. Since I want this distribution to be entirely composed of free software, it would be unacceptable to include these drivers. But there could be an apt repository included that would let you install a proprietary driver if you so wanted to.
Problem #4 - X window system
I will not say much about X here, but I would like it to get the same abilities that quartz has. This is really just an issue of time, so there isn't much to be said, really.
Problem #5 - General user interface
KDE and GNOME provide a decent user interface, but they could be better. I know the goal of the projects is to be portable, so having Linux-specific configuration tools isn't something being worked on currently. I think there should be a project to create easy to use administration tools for KDE and/or GNOME that allow the user to configure their Linux system using only the GUI.
Another issue with the desktop is, well, polish. KDE and GNOME are great, but both (especially KDE) could use an interface polish. (GNOME could use a speed boost and some bug fixes in Nautilus, but that's a different story.) It's really not that hard - just eliminate redundency in menus, lay out things in a more simplified and easy to grasp way - in short, don't suffer from feature creep. And for heaven's sake, include a sane and attractive desktop configuration out of the box. The fact is that 90% of computer users don't change their PC's settings - ever.
Problem #6 - Multimedia and the DMCA
This is a tough but real issue. How will Linux users be able to legally enjoy multimedia like Quicktime, WMV, MP3's, DVD's and so on, when practically all of these things are rife with ominous "Intellectual Property" concerns? There is currently no legal way to watch DVD's in Linux using Free Software, and if current US laws don't change it may remain that way indefinitely. This issue is really more of a legal problem than a techinal one. We need to change laws in order for Linux to be usable for the average person in this respect.
Well, that perhaps covers it. I have been typing for a straight hour now, so I think I'll give it a rest, maybe add some more stuff later.
So what do you all think?
-
intresting, i wanna read more...
although i've never had a problem viewing dvds unless they were encrypted... and even then ogle took care of it. It is illegal to decrypt them? perhaps what should be done is someone needs to make a good, proprietary, dvd viewer for linux. From what I (think I) know, getting the decryption information legally isn't possible for open source programs because then everyone can see them and it defeats the point of encrypting it. So make a proprietary one. It works for other operating systems why not linux? but maybe i'm not seeing the problem as it really is. I dont think i'm up to speed with all this dvd stuff.
i like ur ideas though, intrested in hearing more.
-
I say that the desktop is best left to Mac OS X. FreeBSD and Linux should stay on servers. And maybe Windows for Solitaire and blue screens.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Laukev7:
I say that the desktop is best left to Mac OS X. FreeBSD and Linux should stay on servers. And maybe Windows for Solitaire and blue screens.
The sad thing is Linux has a larger user base than Mac OS. Macs haven't been able to overthrow x86 in over 17 years(not by a long shot) and I doubt they ever will. Mac OS hasn't been able to overthrow Windows since Windows 2.0 and I doubt it ever will. Microsoft has a good thing going on and I forsee them ruling the desktop world for years to come.
Linux hasn't been able to overthrow Windows since it was spawned(for a long time) and I doubt it ever will. I bet the end of Microsoft will come from an unknown OS from an unexpected company some time from now. The OS that will get the job done will not use the Linux kernel or Unix kernel. It will not be open source, it will not have anything to do with GNU and it will not be under GPL. It will not be rehash from any other OS and of course it will be easy to use. Even though the OS will overthrow MS's dominance it will not knock MS out of the game. MS will just become #2.
Of course I don't know this for a fact but that is how I forsee it happening.
[ November 19, 2003: Message edited by: Viper ]
-
I think Mickey Mouse is going to come out with a good OS soon. It's gonna be called Epcot '04 or something like that. Yeah. That's the ticket.
No, really. All those are valid points... and again, I must point to NeXTStep... it solved all these problems years ago...
Because the solution exists, the problem presents itself. Why doesn't the Linux community try to spur the development of a good X11 alternative? Linux User posted a link to something that looks damn good in another thread. Fresco is very promising. Also, what would have been wrong with someone developing Display Ghostscript?
http://www.gyve.org/dgs/ (http://www.gyve.org/dgs/)
It apparently exists, but like so many GREAT PROJECTS it dies, and in its stead, mediocrity continues.
As for software installs? Again, need to bow down to NeXTStep...
NeXTStep has two ways... one way is an actual OS mechanism. You have .pkg files which contain an install script, and the files to be installed in a compressed format. What is the .pkg file? Not a file, actually. .pkg bundles, are bundles like any other bundle in NeXTStep... they're actually FOLDERS! Nothing fancy, it's just that the file browser (Workplace Manager in NeXTStep, OpenStep, and Rhapsody, or Finder in Mac OS X) sees them as a single object (remember, object-oriented design!).
(http://ecsyle.com/jimmy/media/package.jpg)
You double-click the .pkg and the Installer opens...
(http://ecsyle.com/jimmy/media/installer.jpg)
It handles everything. There are no dependency issues... EVER. Apps use documented APIs that are provided by the OS. This guarantees that the app will always run, every time, on every machine that runs the OS. NeXTStep doesn't use the low-level UNIX methods for running and installing apps.
Apps are also stored in .app bundles, which, like .pkg bundles contain everything needed. The binary, all of its resources (images, icon, strings, et cetera) are inside there, and like .pkg bundles, it is treated as a single object by the file browser. You see an icon labled "Mail" but it's really a 5MB folder tree.
And that leads to the other way to install apps in NeXTStep... drag-and-drop. If the app contains everything it needs in one icon... you can just move and copy it around. No problemo!
How does it do it? NeXTStep is really, really layered. There's the low-level stuff, and then atop all that rides the high-level Objective-C stuff. All the high-level components interact with the kernel directly, and not as applications. YellowBox and Cocoa would be hard to run on Linux without an AWFUL LOT of work being done. See GNUStep... they're building NeXTStep-compliant components to create a NeXT-layer for other OSes.
They've done an admirable job, btw.
-
quote:
It is illegal to decrypt them?
It is in the US.
quote:
I say that the desktop is best left to Mac OS X.
As far as you're concerned, maybe. Millions of people use Unix variants as desktops and have no problem with them.
[ November 19, 2003: Message edited by: flap ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by Laukev7:
I say that the desktop is best left to Mac OS X. FreeBSD and Linux should stay on servers. And maybe Windows for Solitaire and blue screens.
You're forgetting why Linus developed the Linux kernel in the first place. He wanted to run UNIX on his home PC. The fact is, the things linux has going for it in the server world - stability, reliability, responsiveness, security - all make it a good candidate for a desktop OS.
Until OS X can run on more architectures than PPC, or until PPC becomes the dominant architecture, I doubt Apple will ever have a market share above 5%.
Linux on the other hand is being adopted everywhere - 1 million computers in China, the govt. of Brazil, Munich, and many other places I can't remember. Linux will win for the same reason Windows beat out OS/2 back in the day - not because it's better than the competition, but because it's cheap and "good enough" to be used.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Viper:
Linux hasn't been able to overthrow Windows since it was spawned(for a long time) and I doubt it ever will. I bet the end of Microsoft will come from an unknown OS from an unexpected company some time from now. The OS that will get the job done will not use the Linux kernel or Unix kernel. It will not be open source, it will not have anything to do with GNU and it will not be under GPL. It will not be rehash from any other OS and of course it will be easy to use. Even though the OS will overthrow MS's dominance it will not knock MS out of the game. MS will just become #2.
Of course I don't know this for a fact but that is how I forsee it happening.
[ November 19, 2003: Message edited by: Viper ]
Certainly a possibility, but I sincerely doubt the OS that defeats Windows won't be under the GPL. Why is that? Because open source, copylefted software is the only kind that is immune to Microsoft's monopolist tactics. Just look what happened to BeOS. Even if your OS was technically better, Microsoft is so entrenched and has so much money that you would quickly go bankrupt trying to compete with them. One business can't do this job - you need a social movement. And you need a license that will prevent them from taking your OS when it starts to become a serious competitor, improving it, and releasing it as their own as proprietary software. That's what infuriates Microsoft. They hate the GPL, and would destroy linux easily if it didn't exist. They *can't* use the source code in their non-free OS and there isn't a thing they can do about it (except pay SCO to try to invalidate the GPL)
-
I never had any of those problems.
Still, I do agree their should be a easier distro, but not at all costs. In the past, people already tried to do this. Powerless systems like BeOS and NeXTStep were the result.
quote:
quote: It is illegal to decrypt them?
It is in the US.
...educational use... ;)
-
uh... BeOS isn't a UNIX-derived system
-
quote:
Originally posted by jimmy james:
uh... BeOS isn't a UNIX-derived system
Yes it is!
All lower levels are unix based.
They just made a mess of it.
[ November 20, 2003: Message edited by: insomnia ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by Linux User #5225982375:
Certainly a possibility, but I sincerely doubt the OS that defeats Windows won't be under the GPL. Why is that? Because open source, copylefted software is the only kind that is immune to Microsoft's monopolist tactics. Just look what happened to BeOS. Even if your OS was technically better, Microsoft is so entrenched and has so much money that you would quickly go bankrupt trying to compete with them. One business can't do this job - you need a social movement. And you need a license that will prevent them from taking your OS when it starts to become a serious competitor, improving it, and releasing it as their own as proprietary software. That's what infuriates Microsoft. They hate the GPL, and would destroy linux easily if it didn't exist. They *can't* use the source code in their non-free OS and there isn't a thing they can do about it (except pay SCO to try to invalidate the GPL)
Linux User, I like you. You dont talk about linux like it is trash like so many others here.
1. A uniform, easy to use, package management system. Part of the problem with file dependencies has nothing to do with bad package management. The truth is that since almost all software on linux is free, the authors and packagers are often different people. This means problems with dependencies are likely to occur. If no one has noticed, there are almost no dependency problems on commercial linux software. Since I own quite a bit of commercial linux software, I can tell you, it works great, and features cool things like graphical installers. You cant tell me no one has had dependency problems in Windows. I remember back in the day trying to install a game in windows and it not working because I had the wrong version of directX.
2. DVD. This is essential. Linux prides itself on being a viable alternative, however, if it cant "legally" do this, it will never be able to compete. For this certain feature we need a big name linux company such as SuSE. This company buys all the DVD license crap, and builds a closed source proprietary DVD/Media player that is bundled with their United States version of the OS. Of course it would be full featured. They then pack it with their higher cost SuSE software bundle. This will help get linux dvd started.
[ November 20, 2003: Message edited by: ThePreacher ]
-
quote:
This company buys all the DVD license crap, and builds a closed source proprietary DVD/Media player that is bundled with their United States version of the OS. Of course it would be full featured. They then pack it with their higher cost SuSE software bundle. This will help get linux dvd started.
That's about the worst thing that could happen. More non-free software on GNU/Linux, and its users have to start bowing down before the DMCA. People should continue to resist it by using DeCSS, whether it's legal or not.
-
quote:
Originally posted by flap:
That's about the worst thing that could happen. More non-free software on GNU/Linux, and its users have to start bowing down before the DMCA. People should continue to resist it by using DeCSS, whether it's legal or not.
First thing you need to know is that in order to make it so an OS can play DVD's legally, they must buy a license. This is not a cheap license, and the cost is absorbed by the end user of the product. You wonder why windows XP and Mac OS X cost money, this is part of the reason. Its funny how Windows and Mac users never complain about having to purchase software, but some linux users are so fucking lazy and cheap, that they dont want to spend a dime for things they want. You wonder why no one takes linux seriously. Im not for breaking the law, and neither are the linux companies or they would just include DeCSS on the install disc. My idea is not impractical, in fact it is logical. You say we shouldnt bow down to the DMCA, but if we dont linux will never be able to compete. We need a legal implementation of a linux dvd player.
-
I'm not talking about not being willing to 'pay' for software. If you don't understand what Free Software is or why it's important that Free software remains Free (as in freedom) I suggest you read the link in my sig. If GNU/Linux can never compete as a result of this (actually I don't think the DVD issue is in the least bit important to the system's adoption) then so be it. To compromise the integrity of the system by tainting it with proprietary software is not a desirable option. We can already watch DVD's on our Free operating system, end of story. Nothing needs to change there, except the law.
-
Flap's right. We don't want GNU/Linux to become like Windows.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Linux User #5225982375:
Linux on the other hand is being adopted everywhere - 1 million computers in China, the govt. of Brazil, Munich, and many other places I can't remember. Linux will win for the same reason Windows beat out OS/2 back in the day - not because it's better than the competition, but because it's cheap and "good enough" to be used.
Thats one million this year, the chinese consortium wants AT LEAST 200 million copies of linux installed in total
web page (http://linuxtoday.com/it_management/2003111801026NWDTPB)
-
I think Linux has a lot going for the desktop. The usual rehtoric that I here form the windows children ALWAYS falls flat on their face.
Its the most standardized desktop i've seen and its way easier to use and maintain than windows.
The thing I see is the issue with fedora.
RH8 and 9 were perfect and only needed polishing here and there. However fedora went off the deep end and seemed to start all over again.
If they just sat down and worked out all the bugs out in the RH bugzilla list the next release of fedora would be smashing!!!!
I don't mind them releasing every 5 to 6 months, just make sure all the errors are gone first from the batas makeing the alpha pritty much perfect.
I hope they do this with there next release with fedora and the like since it does have major potential.
I can see people who use macs having a problem with Linux. But I don't see it with windows users. The fact is that Linux is suppirior to windows period. Infact if Longwhore comes out the way its planed that would really be the finnal nail in the coffine. Nobody wants DRM. Well, at least DRM in that way.
Micosoft, no matter how you look at it will be gone in a couple of years.
The people who are happy with windows will always stick to their current version. Meaining the people that use xp will stick to xpee and the people who get longwhore are eather gonna downgrade or move to something else like Linux.
So Linux also has pleanty of room to grow because of that too.
-
quote:
Originally posted by ThePreacher:
First thing you need to know is that in order to make it so an OS can play DVD's legally, they must buy a license. This is not a cheap license, and the cost is absorbed by the end user of the product. You wonder why windows XP and Mac OS X cost money, this is part of the reason. Its funny how Windows and Mac users never complain about having to purchase software, but some linux users are so fucking lazy and cheap, that they dont want to spend a dime for things they want. You wonder why no one takes linux seriously. Im not for breaking the law, and neither are the linux companies or they would just include DeCSS on the install disc. My idea is not impractical, in fact it is logical. You say we shouldnt bow down to the DMCA, but if we dont linux will never be able to compete. We need a legal implementation of a linux dvd player.
yes its called xine! :D
-
quote:
Originally posted by -=Solaris.M.K.A=-:
yes its called xine! :D
You obviously know absolutely nothing about linux dvd. I wont blame you for your ignorance though. Xine does not play encrypted DVD's legally. It can play unencrypted DVD's legally, however in order to play encrypted DVD's you must use DeCSS, which might I add is an illegal thing to use in the United States. This hasnt stopped too many people, however I think it is time for a legal alternative on linux.
-
quote:
Originally posted by ThePreacher:
Xine does not play encrypted DVD's legally. It can play unencrypted DVD's legally, however in order to play encrypted DVD's you must use DeCSS, which might I add is an illegal thing to use in the United States.
That is subject to debate. Xine does not use DeCSS. Xine uses libdvdcss.
Check out shaolinuxtemple (http://www.shaolinuxtemple.org/tech005.3.html).
Libdvdcss has not (yet) been ruled illegal.
-
http://www.intervideo.com/jsp/LinDVD.jsp (http://www.intervideo.com/jsp/LinDVD.jsp)
-
A standard Lib, Devel, and API set should be included with each version of the linux kernel so each that each distro has the same basic libs Devels and APIs this way if you make an RPM that needs anything that is not on the list of the latest set of Standards, you include it in your RPM (standard set includes libssl9.2 but your Binary needs libssl1.5 you include libssl1.5 in your RPM) , and TADA no dependancy hell.
-
quote:
Yes it is!
All lower levels are unix based.
They just made a mess of it.
No... it ISN'T.
BeOS has some POSIX compliance, but it was built new from the ground up. Be OS has a whole hella lot more in common with Mac OS 9 than it does any of the UNIX clones.
It might use a UNIXesque kernel,
I don't have time to finish this. I win
-
from the book "The BeOS Bible"
quote:
Unix is an operating system, and BeOS is an operating system, but BeOS is not a Unix-based operating system. BeOS is, however, POSIX-compliant, just like Unix. That means that BeOS has built into it a core set of command structures that are agreed upon by international committee as a standard to provide a degree of interoperability between disparate operating systems. What this means to users is that if they've used one POSIX-compliant operating system, they can probably use another without much difficulty (at least the command-line part). It also means that programs can be ported from one platform to the other with minimal changes.
the web page I found this on (http://www.beosbible.com/exc_terminal.html)
The Book (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0201353776/qid=1069576635/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-8380525-5724900?v=glance&s=books)
-
Already been posted, but heres more. Its in devel. That said read flaps post, we can already play dvds we legally own so who cares about some propreitary pos? It's not like we're murdering kiddies or commiting "vile piracy" by playing our own legally bought dvds with free software.
http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2000-04-04-007-04-NW (http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2000-04-04-007-04-NW)
quote:
Problem #1 - The explosive pace of Linux development makes it difficult for end-users to stay put.
You dont actually have to upgrade you know...
quote:
If there was a desktop Linux distribution that followed this model
To me, Debian is a desktop distro. :) Go try it, you might be pleased, although I will also admit it has a long way to go before it becomes a *popular* desktop distro... the installer is obviously ugly as hell, altho at least the module selection part is rumoured to be getting easier soon.
quote:
Problem #2 - No easy way to install programs, especially 3rd party programs.
true, i love apt get but typing / synaptic / other isn't for everyone.
Everything else I definitely agree with, thanks for the post LU.
quote:
Of course I don't know this for a fact but that is how I forsee it happening.
FUD hazy, check back later sayeth the mystical eight ball. :-P :-P :-P
quote:
I say that the desktop is best left to Mac OS X.
The desktop isn't going to be "left" to anyone. If you are saying that the competition should leave Apple alone then what are you scared of? :-P Apple is a company, and companies can go bankrupt. Unless you can disillusion every single geek then Free Software will never die. Neither will the Linux kernel unless it's replaced by something better in the eyes of the Free Software community, cos without marketing it's survival of the best. Eventually we will win. Sorry, we can wait decades if need be but we can't go bankrupt or die like any company pushing proprietary software can, and all companies die given enough time. :)
-
quote:
Originally posted by evil fucking bastard jimmy james:
No... it ISN'T.
BeOS has some POSIX compliance, but it was built new from the ground up. Be OS has a whole hella lot more in common with Mac OS 9 than it does any of the UNIX clones.
It might use a UNIXesque kernel,
I don't have time to finish this. I win
Did you ever use UNIX?
From their own user website.
=================================================
Is BeOS similar to Unix? Is there a GUI and command line, is it multiuser, etc.?
The BeOS was influenced by a number of operating systems, and Unix is certainly among them. To be very general about it, you might say that the BeOS is more similar to Unix at the lower levels and more like the Mac OS or Windows at the higher levels. There is a GUI and a command line interface. The BeOS is not currently multiuser in the Unix sense.
=================================================
Like I said: The lower levels are UNIX based.
quote:
The desktop isn't going to be "left" to anyone. If you are saying that the competition should leave Apple alone then what are you scared of? :-P Apple is a company, and companies can go bankrupt. Unless you can disillusion every single geek then Free Software will never die. Neither will the Linux kernel unless it's replaced by something better in the eyes of the Free Software community, cos without marketing it's survival of the best. Eventually we will win. Sorry, we can wait decades if need be but we can't go bankrupt or die like any company pushing proprietary software can, and all companies die given enough time. :)
I coudn't agree more.
[ November 23, 2003: Message edited by: insomnia ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by Faust:
Already been posted, but heres more. Its in devel. That said read flaps post, we can already play dvds we legally own so who cares about some propreitary pos? It's not like we're murdering kiddies or commiting "vile piracy" by playing our own legally bought dvds with free software.
http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2000-04-04-007-04-NW (http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2000-04-04-007-04-NW)
Ok Faust and Xeen you obviously didnt actually read the links for LinDVD. Here is a quote from the website.
quote:
Can I get a copy of LinDVD?
LinDVD, InterVideo's Linux software DVD player, is currently available only to manufacturers for evaluation and integration.
So is there a way to play DVD's legally in linux?
NO!!!!!
As for the comment from M. O'brien about xine not needing DeCSS, this is true, however no legal content descrambling software is available for linux. Here is a quote from http://dvd.sourceforge.net/xine-howto/en_GB/html/howto-5.html (http://dvd.sourceforge.net/xine-howto/en_GB/html/howto-5.html)
quote:
DVD support in xine is a little complex due to the uncertain legal situation regarding software capable of decoding DVDs encrypted with the Content Scrambling System (CSS). If you wish to just watch un-encrypted DVDs with no support for menus, title selection or multiple-angles, the bundled xine DVD plugin will suffice. In general, however, most DVDs are encrypted and most people want support for the more advanced features.
-
Who cares about those absurt rules.
Ignore them.
As far as I'm concerned they don't exist.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Preacher:
Ok Faust and Xeen you obviously didnt actually read the links for LinDVD. Here is a quote from the website.
quote:
Originally posted by Faust:
Its in devel.
:-P
[ November 24, 2003: Message edited by: Faust ]
[ November 24, 2003: Message edited by: Faust ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by insomnia:
Who cares about those absurt rules.
Ignore them.
As far as I'm concerned they don't exist.
Its not that end users care about these rules, however the linux companies do care about these rules. Besides what haappens if the MPAA starts to crack down hard like the RIAA is, linux will lose out. How is linux supposed to compete with windows when you cant even play DVD's or MP3's(in the case of redhat) out of the box. These basic features are included in windows and mac OS. Do you really expect a noob to linux to figure out how to get dvd working in linux easily?
-
I think some people here are buying into the FUD of the IRAA/MPAA a little too much.
First off. The IRAA/MPAA can't even get away of suing ordinary people. They are now picking on little kids. So that should tell you something right there.
Second. Those 'organizations' arn't gonna be around much longer anyways so yes who realy cares.
third. you will NOT be able to play dvd's or any other media content in Lonwhore when it comes out UNLESS you purchase a license certificate along with the dvd. Even then it will expire.
You call playing dvds or any media in windows easy? For fuck sakes I had to comb through 2 months of nasty codecs that just kept failing for one reason or other. Compare that on getting media to run on red hat and guess what. Red Hat comes out on top!
DRM! even with companies has nothing to do with media. It has every thing to do with the politics of the United States. Nobody cares about the U.S. other than it causes shit all the time.
So we will always work around it.
-
quote:
Originally posted by ThePreacher:
Its not that end users care about these rules, however the linux companies do care about these rules.
Linux doesn't belong to any company.
-
quote:
Originally posted by insomnia:
Linux doesn't belong to any company.
No, but Linux distros do (i.e. Red Hat, SuSE).
-
quote:
Originally posted by The Anti-Microsoft:
No, but Linux distros do (i.e. Red Hat, SuSE).
They don't have to put it in their distro.
You can download those things.
-
I must ask, why watch DVDs on your computer in the first place? Isn't that what a TV and DVD player is for? You'll get a much better picture that way, too.
-
Because I don't have a DVD player. Or a TV for that matter. Why buy a DVD player when you can watch films on your PC? Also when I watch DVDs I don't have to sit through copyright messages, because I'm using a free software player to view them.
-
Considering I've seen DVD players for as low as $40, and I've seen DVD-ROM drives run for $50 or more, I just haven't seen the attraction. Although if you don't have a TV, then I can understand.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Obvious:
I must ask, why watch DVDs on your computer in the first place? Isn't that what a TV and DVD player is for? You'll get a much better picture that way, too.
Monitors are higer res then regular TV's. And my PC's sound system is far better then my TV's. I'll take my PC over my TV anyday.
-
To each his own, I guess. I actually have a better sound system on my TV than I do on my computer, plus a larger TV screen, so I prefer to watch DVD's on my TV rather than my computer.
-
32" monitors are where its at :D