Before you go all macahoic on the audience, consider this - if you think
Oracles' lack of communication is bad, try a life with Pastor Jobs. At first it
was great - as with any drug. Then came the hard drugs of heavy machinery
emptying your pockets, and at last the thugs of the legal shutting ev
> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 6:18 PM, David Brodbeck
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Is there any real reason to run compiz, other than
> so you can watch your windows go up in flames or
> break into little tiny cubes when you close them?
> That stuff sold Vista but I'm not convinced of its
> value on a *nix de
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 6:18 PM, David Brodbeck wrote:
>
>
> Is there any real reason to run compiz, other than so you can watch your
> windows go up in flames or break into little tiny cubes when you close them?
> That stuff sold Vista but I'm not convinced of its value on a *nix desktop,
> ot
yeah .. not quite as quirky in ubuntu - but the real thing in compiz/emerald
that drives me nuts is the sheer volume of configuration options - i think
apple got it right to simplify the visual effects down to a few key ones and
make them really simple for people to configure/use
personally the
Adding my two cents:
I use OSOL as my everyday workstation OS. I prefer it to Ubuntu (very slightly,
see below), and definitely over WinXP and Win7. One MAJOR reason is that it
doesn't break. Ubuntu is always updating, and that reboot always involves a bit
of nervousness until the login screen
> I don't think anybody really uses those :) Some of
> the more subtle effects are quite useful, though,
> such as the Exposé-like window switching.
So close to perfection - but this bug still bugs me:
http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=10161
--
This message posted from opensolaris
On 7 Jul 2010, at 18:18, David Brodbeck wrote:
> Is there any real reason to run compiz, other than so you can watch your
> windows go up in flames or break into little tiny cubes when you close them?
I don't think anybody really uses those :) Some of the more subtle effects are
quite useful,
On Jul 7, 2010, at 4:14 AM, Calum Benson wrote:
>
> On 7 Jul 2010, at 04:11, Jonathan Edwards wrote:
>
>> i don't know about you, but personally I'd rather spend my time on my
>> family, social life, or developing useful pieces of infrastructure instead
>> of trying to figure out why compiz i
On 7 Jul 2010, at 04:11, Jonathan Edwards wrote:
> i don't know about you, but personally I'd rather spend my time on my family,
> social life, or developing useful pieces of infrastructure instead of trying
> to figure out why compiz isn't working with the Intel embedded video chip on
> an un
"Buy a Mac"
classic and completely appropriate .. to which I can only add ..
You want to develop for [Open]Solaris or Linux?
get a VM and run it on your Mac
i don't know about you, but personally I'd rather spend my time on my family,
social life, or developing useful pieces of infrastructure i
> Richard L. Hamilton wrote:
> > I don't know for a fact how it is with GNOME and
> Xorg,
> > but certainly with CDE and Xsun, the IA scheduling
> class
> > is supported, which is like the regular TS (time
> sharing)
> > scheduling class except that the window with the
> focus gets
> > a priority b
> Just as an example of something that makes
> OpenSolaris a great desktop platform:
Not to mention one of the nicest default themes (Nimbus) out there. Ars
Technica agrees. I mean, it's really an absolute pleasure to use over long
sessions.
I use OpenSolaris as my primary desktop OS at home a
Hi Ed,
The desktop environments used on OpenSolaris-based distros are only a few
points behind the best commercial Linux/BSD desktop products (i.e. mainly due
to number of device drivers supported and ported apps).
Otherwise, someone pointed out a particular not that server roles usually are
d
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Edward Ned Harvey
wrote:
> I continually say that solaris & opensolaris are designed to be servers, not
> desktops. I'd like to go into the reasons why, and see what other opinions
> people have about this.
I disagree; both Solaris and OpenSolaris are perfectly f
Richard L. Hamilton wrote:
> I don't know for a fact how it is with GNOME and Xorg,
> but certainly with CDE and Xsun, the IA scheduling class
> is supported, which is like the regular TS (time sharing)
> scheduling class except that the window with the focus gets
> a priority boost for the sake of
> So now, the reasons why I think solaris/opensolaris are
> well suited to be servers and not so much as desktops:
>
> gnome etc, the gui of opensolaris is no better at task
> switching and application management than windows XP
> was. This is obsolete compared to aero, aqua, or
> compiz. (win7,
> Of course, Solaris is promoted as desktop.
> Look at SRSS solutions. Terminal servers should be
> good desktops, otherwise why should I use it? It's
> silly to use Solaris just to connect user to remote
> Windows Terminal Server. If I wanted to do it I could
> use Windows Terminal Server and RDP
> So now, the reasons why I think solaris/opensolaris are
> well suited to be servers and not so much as desktops:
>
> gnome etc, the gui of opensolaris is no better at task
> switching and application management than windows XP
> was. This is obsolete compared to aero, aqua, or
> compiz. (win7,
as far as i know there is. there's isba and fwbuilder but i haven't used them
personally. ipf syntax is simple and easy to follow. what you need is just your
favorite text editor.
cheers!
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-dis
> I continually say that solaris & opensolaris are designed to be servers, not
> desktops. I'd like
> to go into the reasons why, and see what other opinions people have about
> this.
Your'e way off.
>The characteristics that I think make up servers:
>
> Servers are always on.
>
Nope. One of
Ed said:
"I continually say that solaris & opensolaris are designed to be servers, not
desktops. I'd like to go into the reasons why, and see what other opinions
people have about this."
--->
Well, the basicness of what you said is true -as 'Solaris' primarily is a
server-oriented product from
Slightly cryptic, with the emphasis being on "slightly". Besides, why would
you wan to trust something as mission critical as a packet filter rule set to a
gui, _unless_ you were merely using as convenience to generate rules that you
then reviewed and tuned manually under a microscope and text
- Original Message -
> "By default, there is no firewall."
>
> OpenSolaris has a firewall, it's called IPF. You need to put in your
> rules and enable it.
Is there a GUI available for ipf or just the (slightly cryptic) command line
interface?
Vennlige hilsener / Best regards
roy
--
Roy
Yes to both.
I run OSol on a home, non production server. It performs many server tasks:
file sharing via CIFS, iSCSI storage (including various boot images for
laptops), time server, VirtualBox server, backup server, media server for the
Tivo and, most importantly, a desktop server via Sun Ra
Of course, Solaris is promoted as desktop.
Look at SRSS decisions. Terminal servers should be good desktops, otherwise why
should I use it? It's silly to use Solaris just to connect user to remote
Windows Terminal Server. If I wanted to do it I could use Windows Terminal
Server and RDP clients
"By default, there is no firewall."
OpenSolaris has a firewall, it's called IPF. You need to put in your rules and
enable it.
OpenSolaris has wireless. It works, I used it.
OpenSolaris has flash.
"Desktops have features which enhance process management and task switching."
>From that, I gue
You (Edward Ned Harvey) wrote:
> I continually say that solaris & opensolaris are designed to be servers, not
> desktops. I'd like to go into the reasons why, and see what other opinions
> people have about this.
>
>
>
> The characteristics that I think make up servers:
>
> Servers are always
I continually say that solaris & opensolaris are designed to be servers, not
desktops. I'd like to go into the reasons why, and see what other opinions
people have about this.
The characteristics that I think make up servers:
Servers are always on.
Servers don't need power management; they n
28 matches
Mail list logo
