Comments on: Episode 78 - Mike’s Visit http://castingfromtheserverroom.com/podcast/2007/episode-78-mikes-visit Matt, Bill, DJ, and Mike talk about technology in education. Sun, 05 Feb 2012 14:05:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4 by: Mike http://castingfromtheserverroom.com/podcast/2007/episode-78-mikes-visit#comment-12553 Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:42:56 +0000 http://castingfromtheserverroom.com/podcast/2007/episode-78-mikes-visit#comment-12553 In response to Mike from PSUCast and TechPodZone: I didn't slam you or your podcasts. I haven't listened to your casts yet, though I do intend to. ANd just so you know, some of my best friends in the districts I work in ARE the Tech Teachers! And for future reference, I prefer the term Network Dictator... ;-) Remember I DID say when we started I WAS there to be CONTRARY!!! I look forward to talking to you. Cheers! Mike the Network Nazi In response to Mike from PSUCast and TechPodZone: I didn’t slam you or your podcasts. I haven’t listened to your casts yet, though I do intend to. ANd just so you know, some of my best friends in the districts I work in ARE the Tech Teachers! And for future reference, I prefer the term Network Dictator… ;-) Remember I DID say when we started I WAS there to be CONTRARY

I look forward to talking to you. Cheers!

Mike the Network Nazi

]]> by: Mike http://castingfromtheserverroom.com/podcast/2007/episode-78-mikes-visit#comment-12549 Thu, 01 Nov 2007 01:12:02 +0000 http://castingfromtheserverroom.com/podcast/2007/episode-78-mikes-visit#comment-12549 Ok, so you mention both of our shows, PSUCast and TechPodZone, and you had people on who kind of slammed us. We would like a chance to podcast together and clear up some misconceptions. Your guest Mike seems to have all the answers . How about getting together to debate the whole Network Nazi syndrome. We'd love to discuss that one. We'd love to have a show about powerschool as well. So let us know when we can get together. Mike Ok, so you mention both of our shows, PSUCast and TechPodZone, and you had people on who kind of slammed us. We would like a chance to podcast together and clear up some misconceptions. Your guest Mike seems to have all the answers . How about getting together to debate the whole Network Nazi syndrome. We’d love to discuss that one.

We’d love to have a show about powerschool as well. So let us know when we can get together.

Mike

]]> by: Claudio http://castingfromtheserverroom.com/podcast/2007/episode-78-mikes-visit#comment-12539 Tue, 30 Oct 2007 20:43:37 +0000 http://castingfromtheserverroom.com/podcast/2007/episode-78-mikes-visit#comment-12539 On the topic of GNU/Linux package management, you have the option of using the Add/Remove option on the Applications menu in Ubuntu. All of the applications and files come up in normal English, making it easy for the user to see exactly what it is they are installing. For the ones that are a little more advanced and know the names of the apps, there's Synaptic. Uninstalling is also through both of these applications. As for installing a .deb that's downloaded outside of APT's repos, right clicking it and selecting to "install with GDebi" automatically installs the package and resolves all necessary dependencies for the package that are available in the repositories. Very rarely will you find a .deb package that will not have its dependencies resolved even in this manner. IMO, the APT package system is by far the best out there. I remember what the RPM-hell was like which is one of the reasons I haven't touched an RPM-based distro in years. And interestingly enough, RPM-based distros have YUM which is supposed to do exactly what APT does, albeit not as elegantly (it's very slow compared to APT). The problem you have with installs in Mac OS X is that because they are self-contained there's no consistency of the libraries being used. Each application has the libraries self contained, resulting in a lot of redundancy and waste. Why have all these apps that use different versions of the same library when you can have it managed by a package manager so that all apps use the same libraries and are consistent? Yes, it's nice that the Mac OS can drag and drop applications, but now that it's in a UNIX environment the meme loses some of its luster. On Windows, you end up with a ton of DLLs that eventually tend to step on each other's toes. No management whatsoever, and it's all dropped on the users' lap. A lot of people that I have met who say that GNU/Linux still isn't up to snuff are those that really haven't given GNU/Linux the chance that it deserves. They are basing it either on more advanced distributions not geared to end users or distributions that are dated. GNU/Linux had truly come QUITE a long way, and with Ubuntu it's now definitely viable on the desktop. On the topic of GNU/Linux package management, you have the option of using the Add/Remove option on the Applications menu in Ubuntu. All of the applications and files come up in normal English, making it easy for the user to see exactly what it is they are installing. For the ones that are a little more advanced and know the names of the apps, there’s Synaptic. Uninstalling is also through both of these applications.

As for installing a .deb that’s downloaded outside of APT’s repos, right clicking it and selecting to “install with GDebi” automatically installs the package and resolves all necessary dependencies for the package that are available in the repositories. Very rarely will you find a .deb package that will not have its dependencies resolved even in this manner.

IMO, the APT package system is by far the best out there. I remember what the RPM-hell was like which is one of the reasons I haven’t touched an RPM-based distro in years. And interestingly enough, RPM-based distros have YUM which is supposed to do exactly what APT does, albeit not as elegantly (it’s very slow compared to APT).

The problem you have with installs in Mac OS X is that because they are self-contained there’s no consistency of the libraries being used. Each application has the libraries self contained, resulting in a lot of redundancy and waste. Why have all these apps that use different versions of the same library when you can have it managed by a package manager so that all apps use the same libraries and are consistent? Yes, it’s nice that the Mac OS can drag and drop applications, but now that it’s in a UNIX environment the meme loses some of its luster. On Windows, you end up with a ton of DLLs that eventually tend to step on each other’s toes. No management whatsoever, and it’s all dropped on the users’ lap.

A lot of people that I have met who say that GNU/Linux still isn’t up to snuff are those that really haven’t given GNU/Linux the chance that it deserves. They are basing it either on more advanced distributions not geared to end users or distributions that are dated. GNU/Linux had truly come QUITE a long way, and with Ubuntu it’s now definitely viable on the desktop.

]]>