Author Susan Linton from OSTATIC says:

 If people want to learn Linux, they should learn directory structure, driver handling, software management, and the such.

I’m usually not bothered by this. People could learn this type of information, but when we’re talking operating systems, we’re talking majority of the people don’t care. Unity fits this. You obviously don’t, so don’t use it. Linux for ALL, so if you have an issue with something, use something else.

You see, any application you open up when using Unity can be easily pinned the the launcher by simply right-clicking it, and. well do I really need to finish? and that’s just an add-on to the experience.

Also:

Well, when did it become an operating systems’ function to teach people to learn?

This has been going on forever. From what I’ve seen and experienced, a lot of people learn just by simply moving the mouse around and clicking a few things – Sure it can end up a little nasty, but this happens with anything.

And:

Well, I guess your opinion is the only one that matters.

Once again, use something else. Unity is obviously not for you. On the off-chance that you feel you could improve it, the ‘least you could do is submit some suggestions that are useful while you’re on a rant.

In Bacon’s defense, he did clarify some things, and I wouldn’t have thought anything different from it other than what he put anyway. (click the picture for enlarge)

Just makin’ note.

Read the Original

20GB, 100GB, 1TB, 5TB, 10TB, over however much you can afford is up to offer from many people and companies, but how long will it list as such?

I’ve often thought using online backup is similar to car insurance. You don’t want to cause an accident, be in one, or forbid have to also use that insurance to pay for an on-the-road break-down, but you still pay. It’s hard to tell when something will happen, but it’s good to have it that there.

I’ve also thought that if car insurance didn’t exist in the first place, people would drive a lot better than they do now – because there’d be no protection. You mess up your car, you pay for it. You mess up someone else’s car, you pay for it. You total your car, it’s gone — Time to buy a new one, or the other person has to pay for it. I imagine people would drive way better.

Data Loss, Nooooo!

I’m sure some people have been through the terrifying moment where their hard drive decides to take a dive, and spit out every possible noise you didn’t want to hear. Then it happens, you lose some data. Maybe even not important data, but you still have to do an hour (or more) of work to get everything situated again. There’s setups to replicate data, make it faster, and so-on, but that still doesn’t dismiss the fact that data loss may occur at anytime. So what do you naturally want to do?

Send it somewhere else where you think it’ll be safe. With people that you think (or know) that are watching over it at all times, and providing data replication at levels maybe you can’t afford. How often is it though that you have to use this backup? Once a month, a year? Every two years? Do you lose data enough to want off-site backup?

It’s starting to strike me as Insurance

I hope I’m wrong, but this is what it appears as. And quite frankly, I’d rather keep not only a home solution going for replicated data, but also a remote source. I’d rather keep “personal” material at home, and lose it, than trust it with a party I don’t know at all.

There’s still useful Backup Services

Yep – I’ve recommended, and went on and on about Ubuntu One. How you pay a small amount, for a small amount of space. At least you know the odds are, it’s going to be there. Plus, you get extra benefits for paying for it. Music streaming, etc. It’s not just backup. These are the kind of services I’d rather see people getting, than just plain backup solutions that don’t provide any other options with it — otherwise it just looks like an insurance plan that you barely make use of.

Hm!

Image Credit Rene Gariepy

I witnessed, well, “spotted” (because in social networking, you don’t exactly witness. you only spot specific things at specific times, and that’s if you’re paying attention. you can always go back and read the history) Google saying:

https://plus.google.com/107234826207633309420/posts/FrJwQ4j25nT

Now this person doesn’t speak for all of Google, but it does signal conversation that takes place within the Google+ project, and with that being said: What exactly is Google expecting out of users? … I have an idea, obviously I’ll share.

• Users to be themselves without trying to get people to go to their websites – This is difficult because there’s a lot of people that like to get visitors, share content, and some of this deals with getting people to go to their website, and not just their profile.
• Original content within Google+, not your site. I’m not sure how this would play out, but I did take a stab at it: Since Google+ allows you to write extremely long posts/updates, it makes it extremely easy to make blurbs about anything, on the fly, and receive high engagement from your contacts (hopefully) – There is one error with this: Google forgot to increase the history limit of your posts… so they end up being deleted. What a shame. (Unless this is a bug?)
• Google is indirectly (attempting) to get people to engage too much with Google+. Typically, you don’t need to do anything for any amount of time on a network that’s laid out as this is. The Suggested User feature is nothing more than an attempt to spotlight “high profile” people, yet they are shaky about businesses and social ninjas.

Don’t think a social network speaks for your company?

It does. Big time. Let me “talk Facebook” for a minute.

Facebook

Ultimately a large network. Supposedly there’s 750,000,000 users, and are valued at an estimated $50,000,000,000 to $100,000,000,000. and has more advertisements flying around than Yahoo on their News page. You think a company of this state would care about ol’ Google launching a social network of their own? No – You know a company of this is worried about ol’ Google launching a social network of their own.

Since Google+ launched Facebook has made changes that they could’ve already did, but didn’t do. Like presenting Privacy better to their users. … That’s practically all they did.

(and) From these changes it only says that they are worried about Google+. I could point out, that while Google’s “circles” idea is way-useful, Facebook also had a similar idea going on.

Lists on Facebook

Facebook already had it possible to sort through your contacts via Lists. This wasn’t a doable solution. Though they did present it well, they did not utilise it well … enough.

Google+ allows you to do much more with your “lists.” I don’t think I have to go into any more of the comparisons for people to understand those differences.

Google vs. Google

Yeap – I believe this will be hard for Google. To make produce products like they already do, and manage a social network at the same time. It’s much more bigger than you think. Plus, I think Google misses some of the bigger picture with their own products.

Wave

So Google launched “Wave” awhile back, but it was not that much of success. Understandable, and not at the same time. I believe they could’ve implemented the idea of wave a lot better. It already half-way lives in Google+. You know when you edit your posts, etc? It’s half there.

Wave should’ve been implemented into Gmail directly, not just as a separate product. I’m sure there’s plenty of times someone has sent an email, and wanted to edit a few things in it. I’m sure Google has the capacity, and talent to implement such a feature that would allow the sender to real-time edit the email and “save” it.. so when the other person opens it they receive a final, finely edited copy — but no.

What does Wave have to do with Google+?

Not everything, but a small portion. It gives me an outlook how Google really likes to do things sometimes. Sometimes not taking advantage of their existing products. I hope this is not the case with Google+. I hope they integrate (without smothering) the most useful Google products into Google+.

These are just my thoughts on Google+. I do enjoy usin’ it though so far

Good luck

Our paper is delivered to us; sometimes thin, sometimes thick. Often thin and at the end of the week (or beginning) it’s filled with tons of advertisements from local grocery stores. There is however, not that much information in them.

In the next town over, their newspaper is even (forbid I say it) worse. I see tons of articles from “Associated Press.” Now why would I see those articles? Why are they having to be put in to plump up the thickness of the newspaper?

I personally believe that people are finding more obvious routes to their “news.” Twitter especially, a mind-whirl of information spewed out instantly, with no hesitance. This gets to newspapers in every way. Newspaper outlets cannot compete with this, but they can leverage it.

Take CNN for example. One of the biggest news outlets that I know of. They use Twitter, Facebook, and probably a lot more online’lets to capture their readers. I often see others doing the same thing – No – I’m not sayin’ everyone is copying each other. It’d be kind of backward if you didn’t hop on the Internet-train and go with your readers, else you’d be “left behind.” We don’t want that.

That basically leaves “what do you do with the all this paper?” I’ll tell you: Get rid of it, and never look back. We especially don’t need to keep “killing trees” and creating pollution anyway.

I’ve went on and on in the channel, discussing that content delivery is a key factor on mobile devices, and that people need to understand that it’s progressing with or without you. So how do you leverage it all together?

I can’t provide a doable solution to this, because it’s a tricky aspect. Print has its major advantages. Top-level archiving, feels more authentic, harder to duplicate, and well, just overall freshness when you remove the ‘mag from the wrapper.

Blurb..

1)

2)

I haven’t heard of Dillon Francis before until this track, and loving it. I’ll have to check out more.

3)

The Flood – Yes, a flood of my Last.FM page.

4)

Once again, new to this mixer, but: Kicking and Screaming

5)

I’ve honestly never listened (fully) to the WoW “theme” song (or any of them), but if they’re as good as this, let me hear more

A little Video?

Let me start by saying, I suppose the name I expose (Ty Clifford) is not “real.” Ty is not my first name, it’s a nickname – Should I be banned for it? People may recognize me by it, and some may not – Regardless, it’s close enough to be identifiable.

I also use “Snick,” as an alias, should this not be acceptable? Is there something over me that tells me how to use my name in clear air? I hope not. And I’d surely expect Google to be the last company to try to delegate usage of someone’s name.

Since the odds are, you already have a GMail account in which case, your “real” name is already there–so why the need to re-expose it again, if it’s not needed or wanted? Bad move, Google.

If Google wants people to flock from Facebook over to G+, then I’d suggest being less demanding than Facebook.

Give people an option.

Ubuntu at no deniable angle has been bringing new people to Linux for quite a few years now. It has been getting ever-so easy to use it, that when you demonstrate it to people that have never used Linux,. they actually want to try it out. This is a good thing. Though it does get backlash from the other users of Linux, it still proves over and over that it is the dominate front the Linux community needs. So why push it back? Is there a definite reason that Ubuntu should not be what people think of when they think “Linux?”

I’ve stressed in the past that Ubuntu One is a selling point for Ubuntu. Why Canonical does not utilise this aspect is a mind boggle. With Ubuntu One riding the wave with Ubuntu in-general, there could have already been a string pulled to drag in more users to Ubuntu.

There is that short fuse with Microsoft though – You know the one that ties up vendors (OEMs) in screwed up contracts, and agreements that make it really hard to sell anything other than Windows. This needs to stop, by law.

System76

So there is System76. A complete Ubuntu OEM vendor. I wanted, and have said that I would prefer Ubuntu to hit the shelves at Wal-Mart. Particularly because a lot of people shop there. Who knows, Wal-Mart is probably twisted up with Microsoft, so that wouldn’t work out as well as I think it would in the long run.

What to do? Help System76 open up a few retail stores around the US in large cities to see just how it’d pan out. Sure, a few million could be lost, but exposure would definitely be point. So for a flip of the coin, another vendor may attempt to chain a few more branches, too. What is the hurt?

At least 1 Tablet

Yep – This isn’t a must, just a want. It’s something people have been toying with the last couple of years. I’m sure Ubuntu would work decently with the catering of Canonical. If ASUS is not up to it, then help System76.

Stick to Unity

Even though 10.04 may be the stable version for the moment, Unity should instead be the stable. It is new, no denying that, but it’s fresh. Quit poking around with it and make it the default.

If you show people regular Gnome, that’s what they’ll be used to and expect. It’s like going to school, and being taught Microsoft Office instead of LibreOffice. So throw Unity out there first, as something for them to be used to. At worst case scenario, simply remove the bar and continue on.

There’s tons that do not like Unity, who cares. The Unity is not for them. It’s for Linux, the exposure. The point is to strike audiences of all kinds – That’s what I feel Unity does. It does need a little improvement, but as I said, it’s fresh–there’s a lot to work from how it is at the moment.

Work Together, and Work Fast

I’ve seen about three or four other companies do things Ubuntu should’ve did, but didn’t. ChromeOS, anyone? Canonical should be working closely, and more actively with their OEM partners. If it takes as much as buying a retailer for better control, then do it. Work fast, but efficiently, and Canonical is not doing this. Maybe the business side, but not so much the consumer side. And frankly, Ubuntu is a consumer distribution.

Skip over the inside of the Linux community. They will still be here, for any distribution. Get out there to the public, where you’re not known. I hope this ASUS “deal” works out for the best, if not, the chance may have disappeared for retail-style Linux.

A few things that attracted me to the ClearOS solution was (and still is):

• Caching
• Proxy (/Filter)
• Blacklisting
• Anti-Virus
• Web Interface

Now I’m sure there’s others out there, and you can also build this solution yourself. Seeing how I’m familiar with most of these to use, and implement, I did not really care to get lazy and use a web interface with it. I can spend all day in the console, but it doesn’t hurt to have a little cushion there, er.. or to be lazy. The main thing that pulled me towards ClearOS and its all-in-one approach was the caching.

Thus, I wish to share the home network’s caching reports. It surprised me at how much of an impact using a local caching server actually helps.

Reports

This isn’t entirely a month, but I’m sure you can get the idea.

At another glance, by month.

Against what?

In rough-draft-mode, there are at least 4 to 6 active physical machines utilising the Internet. May it be some streaming activity, mail retrieval, or mass-storage movement between here and remote servers .. There can be a huge amount of data consumed. Some screens straight from the feeder (router) itself:

253GB in (if I did my maths right ..) in total passed in May. So the Squid is doing a great job I’d say at attempting to capture what it can.Whether it’s caching more than serving is up to question. Reviewing some of the domains it’s been serving most is generally photo and music sites. (YouTube, HypeM, Grooveshark,  Facebook, etc).

So I’d safely say, that in some cases this is a relief to the network. It may not be the “all and all” solution for using less bandwidth when it comes to mass-storage movement, but it does indeed lower web (http/) traffic to free up some space for something else.

Visit ClearOS

Get Social

Grooveshark,  and notably HypeM, these services have something in common – Social; Twitter, Facebook, whatever. They all allow you to tag your music and easily share it with your friends. Google Music (beta) lacks this, and could prove to be a bothersome in the future when someone really enjoys a song.

To the ‘least, add Last.FM support. This would be an excellent feature.

The “Desktop”

I understand Google has ChromeOS going on, where everything is centered around the web but.. a desktop application wouldn’t hurt.

I installed the “sync” application (that’s all it is), and while it may be useful, it as I said, lacks a music player interface.

That’s all!

Visit Google Music

Image via: WebTabLab

A few months ago I wrote that Ubuntu should hit the shelves. Due to Unity being a big hop, why not? Since it’s such a swift turn in direction from other streamline distributions, it’s the best time to throw it out there. People in the store would know Ubuntu as Unity, not straight-forward GNOME. This, I believe, would be a natural come-to for new-comers to Ubuntu, and Linux in general. Get them used to it as Unity and stick with it.

Outegrations that need Improved

As it is, there is a “Files & Folders” icon that you can click on and proceed to a folder. When you click on this folder it opens up a file browser (Nautilus) – This should be changed and allow you to navigate through folders within that area. Much like Nautilus, this icon should also allow you to point at a music file and it starts playing – Or you can right click it, and select “Play,” “Add to Queue,” or something else that would be suitable such as: “Sync,” or “Push.” Basically, the entire “Unity” experience needs or should be integrated into Ubuntu One. It shouldn’t be forced onto the user, but should be there/exposed for convenience.

This is an outegration that is a downside to the clutter-free / seamless environment. It by default, should be an integration.

Not a Review

This is not a review. Just a “some things I’d change” post. I have not used it long enough to give any final passing-thoughts. I feel that this is a big relocate-move for Ubuntu, and it’s still too touchy to be able to lay a final piece out.

Edit: I removed the “Social Layer” bit due to this already being available when you click on your own username. I was thinking something slightly different, but this works practically the same way. (being able to easily post updates to networks)