51–60 of 103 posts
Looks like a case design from the 90s. Do people really think laptop industrial design peaked then?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Very neat, but it's specs are a little lack-lustre It's kind of the nature of the beast. It's one of the only (or is it the only?) laptops they can do this with, so if you're committed to a FSF-approved machine you're stuck with old hardware.
Why is that? From the site I see that it's just a modified X200, wouldn't they for example be able to modify a more modern model? Does Intel have special measures to prevent that? Or is it simply reverse engineering that hasn't been achieved yet?
I wish more common laptops would have replaceable firmware, like Lenovo and the like. Having all those blobs with who knows what is very annoying. Especially when that firmware starts behaving as if it owns your computer, and refuses to boot because "WiFi card is not authorized" or some other such idiocy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So I'm not allowed to discuss what these people are giving up in the name of "freedom"? That the fact that this is a refurbished machine from seven years ago shouldn't be brought up? That functionality was removed in order to, through some bizarre twist of logic, make the machine "more free"? Given that this is a machine that is built in the name of ideology, I would argue that questioning aspects of that ideology, a…
You're perfectly free to discuss it. Your posts read more like telling people they're wrong in finding these machines suitable for their purposes than just discussing the tradeoffs they're making. Even this comment, with clearly un-biased turns of phrase like "bizarre twist of logic" and "their idea of purity" conveys a conviction on your part that these people aren't merely wrong, but deluded. Tone down your dismiss…
Regarding RMS, I do not feel that he is a good spokesperson for the Free Software movement, or computing in general. He's requested people to delete Free software and pretend it doesn't exist because it could potentially be used with unwritten software to potentially allow a non-free program to use gcc as part of its chain [1]. He has criticized software because it allows interoperation with a perceived enemy [2]. Lower down on my list of criticisms would be his use of the x60, because it is in a lot of ways saying that free software is an inferior good. Instead of trying to work with a team to create a completely open laptop, like Bunnie Huang has done [3], or use a Chromebook that runs a Free software boot environment by design, he uses a very old laptop instead. Which in the end, is one of the biggest flaws with RMS's operations. He seems unwilling to show that one can use Free, modern, devices and still not limit himself.
I use sharp words because I am tired of the lack of vision, lack of foresight, and lack of creativity from the gnu branch of free/open software. Modifying a seven year old laptop and making it less functional is not revolutionary or interesting. Selling said item for a three time markup is not revolutionary or interesting. There are more than enough options out there, the Free software community needs to put up or shut up.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-02/msg00895.html
[2] http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-02/msg003...
I wish more common laptops would have replaceable firmware, like Lenovo and the like. Having all those blobs with who knows what is very annoying. Especially when that firmware starts behaving as if it owns your computer, and refuses to boot because "WiFi card is not authorized" or some other such idiocy.
I wish more common laptops would have replaceable firmware, like Lenovo and the like. Having all those blobs with who knows what is very annoying. Especially when that firmware starts behaving as if it owns your computer, and refuses to boot because "WiFi card is not authorized" or some other such idiocy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're perfectly free to discuss it. Your posts read more like telling people they're wrong in finding these machines suitable for their purposes than just discussing the tradeoffs they're making. Even this comment, with clearly un-biased turns of phrase like "bizarre twist of logic" and "their idea of purity" conveys a conviction on your part that these people aren't merely wrong, but deluded. Tone down your dismiss…
I feel that the machine here is borne more out of ideology than logic or necessity. The laptops in question, and the software installed, are designed to take away any ability to do things that the designers do not like. For example, the ability to update the CPU's microcode, or load firmware for numerous devices. I would argue the rational approach would be to not ship the firmware, but keep the drivers in place for…
And your justification
I use sharp words because I am tired of the lack of vision, lack
of foresight, and lack of creativity from the gnu branch of free/open software.
I wish more common laptops would have replaceable firmware, like Lenovo and the like. Having all those blobs with who knows what is very annoying. Especially when that firmware starts behaving as if it owns your computer, and refuses to boot because "WiFi card is not authorized" or some other such idiocy.
Yes! I bought a Lenovo laptop in 2008 and tried to replace the wifi card with an Atheros-based one (better driver support on Linux at the time), and it refused to boot afterwards. Never buying a Lenovo laptop again.
I had to return the card, and figure out what the compatible FRU part number is. The card is really exactly the same, just some internal code is different. This is beyond dumb and annoying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would think that power vs battery life would be pretty high on the list of priorities for technically inclined users. I current-gen core i3 (like the 5010U) packs quite a bit of performance vs. the power it requires. For me, first and foremost are the parts that I interact with... namely the screen, keyboard and mouse. TBH, I have yet to try a laptop keyboard I like... I use a model-m style keyboard from Unicomp (1…
> As to the software, I could care less mostly. This offering is essentially for people who care about the software more than anything else. So this is probably not for you. > priorities for technically inclined users. There are a bunch of very different people who can claim to be technically inclined. Let's stop generalizations.
Plus, tracker1's software tastes are pretty much unrelated to the claim that efficiency is important.