I remember, what people from Poland do with Facebook plans to implement XMPP. They hound plans and Facebook on official forums. They do not know, how world working. They claims Facebook should implement support for Gadu-Gadu, closed source competitor of Facebook/XMPP. If Gadu-Gadu agree, that would be kill for it. People does not understood Gadu-Gadu protocols are closed source (so agreement, etc. needed) and XMPP are free. It brinks me think about discussion with Windows users on forums. Mental slayers of closed source/Microsoft/etc. They known nothing about software or how world works, but they pretend to be specialist for many different kind of knowledge, like politics, IT, psychologist, economics, etc. I think, that many Windows users forces producer of this device to deliver it with Windows. Simple: by scamming.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

When we own games? Even, when we bought CD/DVD, we do not own content of it. We only buy rights to use content of CD/DVD in way vendor allow us. Do you read ever license text, of any non-free game?

Nearest of giving right to owning games are GOG. You can download offline installer and rip into CD. That's great! There's a way to connect modernity and tradition. You need to play game - you download, install, remove installer and play. Need to preserve game - you download installer and write to CD (or keep on hard drive). There is still big issue: you cannot sell/rent/etc, since GOG disallow this, that's the biggest reason, even GOG do not sell games.

But, where this removing user/client rights will bring us? I've read talk of some EU female parliament member. She told, that in future you do not own anything and you will be happy. She told, it will be great case for all of us. Do you even imagine, where this bring us? Every piece of our world, in future, will have integrated programmable circuit. Maybe every part of our world will be connected to internet. And yet, European Commission is trying to made internet non-anonymous. That's bring one think to us. Imagine, non-anonymous internet user will blame one's(?) car vendor or director of company producing cars. Next day, he/she would not go to work, because car vendor could lock one's car and order him/hes to remove his talk/post from internet. He would not go to job. This person could lost job and everything by one, single post on internet. In this case, most wealth people could control information on internet. Your shoes will have electrical circuit and was connected to internet, you say: Mark of X (Shoe's vendor manager) is stupid person. You do not even known, where mark work, but on next day, you would not even tie your (?) shoes, so you do not go walk, to shop, to work, to school, church, etc. You better own (?) many shoes of different vendor, or you will starve or will go to shop without shoes.

If companies will control our internet routers/modems, operating systems on PC, they even can analyze, what we wrote and turn off our devices needed to write post on internet.

So, if we would still allow companies to not sell their software to us, we could wake up in reality worse than communism regime! But many people would not known that, because people will be enslaved by vendors of things they own and companies will force them to write false information or remove truth from internet. What you could do to be able to walk around, go to shop, church, school, work, chemistry, hospital, use your internet connection, play games, turn on you computer, etc.?

So: promote free software and force parliaments to give more rights to device/software users (I am not write owners by indention), or we will be slavers.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: LachuBad Windows. People are using Windows and get sad. On normal systems, secretary/accountant do not has sufficient rights, but on Windows (with unskilled, cheap admin?). Additionally, Windows is not resist to malware, there was many bad design decision during Windows creating, like opening programs downloaded from internet by double-click, etc.

You don't need admin/root for this attack to work and even on Windows any regular it department would remove admin rights from end users machines.

I know, there is no admin rights, but on Linux, after downloading malicious software, I must point system, this is a software, and I try to open/execute software. On Windows, some one could compile program with nice photography as icon, told me, this is photography from trip and I would open it! That's all...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Thibug

Quoting: LachuBad Windows. People are using Windows and get sad. On normal systems, secretary/accountant do not has sufficient rights, but on Windows (with unskilled, cheap admin?). Additionally, Windows is not resist to malware, there was many bad design decision during Windows creating, like opening programs downloaded from internet by double-click, etc.

I don't like Windows, however it has nothing to do with that story. Social Engineering doesn't care about the OS.

Yes. But there is difference, when system is designed in bad way, and clicking on link could install malware, or secretary have rights to install software by default.

Linux do not allow to install software without provide an password by default. Even, when we download software pointed by link, like on Windows (for example, somebody told us this is only image from holiday trip and not software), we must told system, we knew this file contain software. On Windows, we try to open image from holiday or report, potentially in Excel format, and we made mistake!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Bad Windows. People are using Windows and get sad. On normal systems, secretary/accountant do not has sufficient rights, but on Windows (with unskilled, cheap admin?). Additionally, Windows is not resist to malware, there was many bad design decision during Windows creating, like opening programs downloaded from internet by double-click, etc.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Microsoft needs to sell copyrighted GNU/GPL code as public domain to ones customers? I think, yes. I must reminder you, that some organization decided to take to court of Microsoft, because MS is stilling Free Software. Looking at history of this company, it always stole. MS stole GUI from Xerox, stole network protocols (kerbos), stole many solution from Linux desktop and now sold way to stole GNU/GPL code without need to break law.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

As I remember, Civ5 have native Linux version. I think, I even use native version on my Linux PC.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

So, standalone ChromeOS have had smaller market share than other desktop Linux distributions?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Freedesktop.org SDK 23.08 (Flatpak runtime) 64 bit 5.73% +5.73%

It's quite odd. Did you mistype here?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Why option to use dedicated GPU are added? Games like that should not need many GPU power, is not?

View this comment - View article - View full comments