When it comes to using free as in beer copies of Linux downloadable at a site of their choice or Windows eXtreme Pracy Version 2006, also "free", which are they selecting?
That doesn't bode well for Microsoft.
They can throw a fit about piracy in China and try to hold their (China's) collective feet to the fire, but secretly, they've got to see it as a compliment (albeit bad).
I still maintain Linux should build up as much of a market share as possible. Now that the Intel hardware provides a duel desktop, people (as in at work) will be more more likely to move Apple|Windows than to Linux, despite the financial investment. The UIs are more mature, and the training would be considerably less. (you've heard it here first, over & over &....)
Do you really want the Chinese Government conducting economic warfare by proxy?
It would be a trivial excercise for them to pump a billion U.S. dollars (Thank you China for servicing the National Debt) back into the country in the form of annual licensing fees to patent trolls.
That much money could fund a small army of lawyers... who could then go about wreaking having by suing everyone in sight. And it wouldn't necessarily be an overt act of warfare, just a license check and a whisper to keep suing people.
Hell, I hope someone at the RAND Corp has already thought this up and written a lengthy paper on how we can deal with it.
-- [Fuck Beta]
o0t!
$51 million in revenues by 2010?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
Wow, that sure is.... underwhelming. China is supposed to be a rather large market.
Re:$51 million in revenues by 2010?
by
weierstrass
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
..and Linux is supposed to be a free operationg system
-- my password really is 'stinkypants'
Re:$51 million in revenues by 2010?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Are you stupid or trying to be funny?
Its free, as in open standards, open source, and no unreasonable use restrictions like some companies impose upon you. If you want support like most companies and governments do, you will have to pay for that.
in comparison to....
by
eggoeater
·
· Score: 4, Informative
I'd like to see the growth stats for pretty much everything else in China....
I'm willing to bet that MS products grew a lot more than 27%.
My brother has to go there for business on a regular business.
He says they're building the equivalent of New York City every year.
This is also why we in the US will be paying $5/gallon for gas soon... not because
of our demand but because of Asia's demand.
This is also why we in the US will be paying $5/gallon for gas soon... not because of our demand but because of Asia's demand.
Yeah, if the restof the world would just stick to bicycles and donkeys, Americans could carry on driving 10 mile/gallon SUVs practically for free. It's so unfair that the rest of the world thinks they should have cars too.
-- Oh no... it's the future.
Re:in comparison to....
by
jawtheshark
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Well, with my current job I have to do 100km/day too... That adds up, especially because I was dumb enought to buy a sports car six years ago. (When prices were still acceptable and I only had to do 60km/day) With the fuel efficiency of about 25MPG my car has, it hurts... badly... (I manage to get it up to 27.6MPG by driving like a grampa)
In the US, there seems to be a myth that in Europe one can rely on public transportation all the time. This is true in the big metropolitan areas, but most people still live outside such areas. Going to my work with public transportation would take over 3 hours. With my car, I can make it in an hour in peak times and in less than 40 minutes out of peak times.
-- Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
This is also why we in the US will be paying $5/gallon for gas soon... not because of our demand but because of Asia's demand.
That is narrow, not insightful... You would think you have to be American to burn gas/oil with that statement. I would be willing to bet serously that the per capita consumption of oil/gas products in China is far lower than that of the US.
I would be willing to bet serously that the per capita consumption of oil/gas products in China is far lower than that of the US.
The US population is about 300,000,000. China 1,300,000,000.
Re:in comparison to....
by
Kjella
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
It's different. Most places in America, you can't live normally without driving. Sad, perhaps, but true.
For two reasons. One because you're probably the most obese people on earth, which doesn't get any better by you sitting in cars and at desks all day. Getting to the public transportation is tiresome because you don't get the exercise of using public transportation. The 10 minute walk to/from public transportation actually makes a difference.
Secondly, you don't have much of public transportation because noone would use it. Why should you, your car gets you where you want at almost no cost at all, and I admit the convienience of going exactly when you want it to go, to exactly whereever you're going is an advantage. In order to run it at any profitability, there must be people willing to use it regularly, not as a last ditch emergency when the car breaks down. If you expect public transportation to act as a taxi service on demand, it's not going to happen.
If you tell me it can't be done, bullshit. Our population density is *half* of yours, we pay about $6/gallon already. Sure, the people in the outskirts need a car but you don't even have proper public transportation where you could. In fact, everything there seems to be designed for driving. Let me take a small detail, last time I was there we bought some stuff in a grocery, and the plastic bags were completely unsuited for carrying. They were barely usable enough to get them out to your car in the parking lot. So if you're stuck in a corner, I'd say that's because you're painting yourself in there. Other countries cope, if you can't you need to blame something else than geography.
-- Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Re:in comparison to....
by
DigiShaman
·
· Score: 1
That is narrow, not insightful... You would think you have to be American to burn gas/oil with that statement. I would be willing to bet serously that the per capita consumption of oil/gas products in China is far lower than that of the US.
He/She didn't say that, so stop throwing around hyperbole! The parent is pointing out a simple fact. That is to say, there are too many hands in the pie and not enough to go around. As a result of market forces, expect the price to continue upward.
Americans could carry on driving 10 mile/gallon SUVs practically for free. It's so unfair that the rest of the world thinks they should have cars too.
You may or may not realize this, but a large number of motor vehicles in Asia and Africa are either big trucks or passenger cars w/tiny 1~2 liter engines.
What they lack in engine size, they make up for in quantity. I'm not even sure you could find a car in the U.S. that has a motor less than 1.8 liters. Almost everywhere but America, you'll get a huge number of choices in gasoline and sometimes in diesel too.
I didn't make the $5/gallon remark as a complaint although that's
obviously how it came across. I was just using it as an example of
the amount of growth there and it's impacts.
If I had my way, there'd be more tax on gas, a luxury tax on any
vehicle that got less than 25 mpg, and a LOT more rules that force the oil companies to also provide alternative fuels to gas stations for hybrid fuel cars.
Yes, Asia will impact our economy by both driving up gas prices
and providing goods at dirt cheap prices. The Asian auto industry
will also dominate the US because they see the need for hybrid cars.
(The top 10 car list this year didn't have a single US model.)
Any auto maker that wants to still be around 5 years from now had
better be doing the R&D for high mileage cars.
I would have thought that was obvious. With a population of 1.3 billion, even very low comsumption per capita is a very big drain on the world's supply.
So if you're stuck in a corner, I'd say that's because you're painting yourself in there.
Granted. But it's not something individual Americans can choose not to be a part of.
Anyways, the traditional reason some places have such high gas prices is because their governments have huge gas taxes. But the tax money collected doesn't just disappear; it's spent back into the country, including the people who paid it. High taxes are a pain, but then you figure in things like not having to pay out of pocket for health care, and getting a real pension.
The possible future of extreme gas prices will be quite different. Instead of going into taxes and back to the people, the energy windfall will go partly to Big Oil, but mostly to oil-rich nations. All that wealth will still produce jobs, if you're willing to go to Dubai to get them. And the balance of world power will shift. (We're supposed to worry about terrorists getting money from poppy seeds and mosque fundraisers?)
Re:in comparison to....
by
ScrewMaster
·
· Score: 1
On the other hand, a lot of foreign investment in the United States maufacturing sector was driven by comparatively cheap energy costs. People seem to focus solely on passenger vehicles when discussing energy use: sure, go back to the 70's during the original "energy crisis" and it's true... high prices encourage the manufacture and sale of smaller, more efficient passenger vehicles. Duh. However, there's a lot more to a major industrial economy than cars. A lot more. And I don't think you realize the impact upon your lifestyle that higher energy cost is going to have. Virtually everything you buy involves power and petroleum products (plastics, for example) somewhere in the manufacturing chain. As this trend continues, and it will, what you pay at the pump will seem insigificant compared to what you'll end up paying for everything else. Expensive petroleum affects the entire economic output of any industrialized nation... motor fuels are only a part of that. I'll go a step further and say that petroleum, crude oil, is far too valuable to be wasted moving cars around. Everything from plastics to medicines are made from petroleum. We should reserve its use for those purposes and stop blowing it out of our tailpipes.
In any event, what you're basically saying is that our culture (and that of every other high-tech country on the planet) is going to be changing dramatically in the near future, and in most cases not for the better. China's modernization may (or may not) ultimately be good for them, but it sure as hell isn't good for the rest of us.
-- The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Granted. But it's not something individual Americans can choose not to be a part of.
Exactly! What we need is some real leaders in this country who will rein in urban sprawl and initiate a widespread re-invention of modern cities into walkable communities. This of course wouldn't work everywhere, but where I'm from it's about the only way we'll ever break the end-to-end gridlock on the narrow highways.
-- The Farewell Tour II
Re:in comparison to....
by
hackstraw
·
· Score: 2, Funny
See if I care: I *already* pay $5/gallon *now*...
Offtopic, but its sunday and not much action is going on here.
Yes, Americans do pay less for gas than probably anywhere else in the world, but like everything else, things are relative. Here are the differences between your gas price and ours:
1) We use more, we get volume discount.
2) We essentially own much of the oil in either owning companies like Exxon, and we do produce 40% of our own oil.
3) We drive more. Its a cultural thing. Public transportation is almost taboo here.
4) Another cultural thing, senior citizens "need" a 4x4 to drive to the grocery store, Wal-Mart, and church. No, I'm not making that up.
I'm sure there are other things as well, but that should be a good start.
The real question, "How does this effect the price of tea in China?"
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
One of the potentially worrying things is that over the past 20 years inflation in the USA has been relatively modest despite reasonable economic growth as low inflation has been effectively bought in from far eastern centres of manufacture via the medium of cheap transport built on (relatively) cheap oil. This might end. So far the increase in oil prices has had relatively little effect on inflation or economic growth, and I very much hope 1970s-style stagflation can be avoided, but there is no certainty it can be. Whilst this is good for real-terms level of the US budget deficit it will not be good for those hoping to retire as savings will also be whittled away by inflation. The associated rise in inflation rates will make borrowing for investment in infrastructure more costly, but might help prop up the dollar and not add to inflation by making imports more expensive via exchange rate changes too.
What I hope is that some sort of soft landing is possible. So far oil is still cheaper in real terms than in 1980, and the recent rises towards that real terms 1980 level haven't sparked stagflation. I have my fingers crossed.
Exactly! What we need is some real leaders in this country who will rein in urban sprawl and initiate a widespread re-invention of modern cities into walkable communities.
Al Gore talked about that before the 2000 election. The overall response in the US was "Boring!" and then elected the dipshit who made it easy for big oil to gouge us while other corporations plunder everything else.
Re:in comparison to....
by
dalutong
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
You forget one more point -- Americans have left the cities for the suburbs (and now the "ex"urbs) over the past 50 years. American's are big on property and personal space. I grew up in China and got very used to always been within a couple of feet of someone. When I came to America in '99 I was chastised regularly for walking or standing too close to someone.
I also noticed the envy people had with large yards -- something you can only get far away from cities (for affordable prices.) I think some of this is the "keeping up with the jones'" effect -- everyone in america feels they are middle class, and so no one accepts that they can't afford a house with a yard. so they find a place where they can.
That and people here like bargains. They are happy to drive 20+ minutes to go to the discount shops.
And T.V. I can't remember what the exact numbers are, but the average household has the T.V. on for something like 8 hours. But when you live in the sub/ex-urbs... what else is there to do? You can play in parks, I guess. But you can't really walk anywhere else.
--
What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
Re:in comparison to....
by
Jeff+DeMaagd
·
· Score: 1
This is also why we in the US will be paying $5/gallon for gas soon... not because of our demand but because of Asia's demand.
Speak for yourself. True, Asia has a high demand, but very low demand per person, Asia has a lot more people.
China has the most stringent automobile fuel economy standard in the world. For large countries, the US is the #1 energy consumer in the world per capita. Next highest is Japan at one third the energy consumed per person as the US. The fewy countries that consume more energy per capita are usually the tiny ones whose main export is oil.
Re:in comparison to....
by
InvalidError
·
· Score: 1
And as more of China moves up the tech chain, their per-capita energy demand will only go up until it becomes comparable to developped countries'... this is going to hurt pretty bad 10-20 years down the line. Even if they end up using only half as much as USA people, they'll still consume twice as much collectively.
To GP: you lacked foresight and missed the big picture.
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
How does bullshit like that garner mod points? Forgive me for not playing along with your need to elevate yourself by denigrating others but cars are neccessary in American cities because for near the last 100 years they were planned around cars. Any idiot with ten minutes and a map can discover this for themselves. Decisions made generations before terms like 'environment', 'Middle East' or 'peak oil' became part of the language continue to force our choices today. Get over yourself.
Regarding public transport, spend ten minutes with a bus map. People want public transport but not at the expense of turning a 20 minute drive into a 50 minute, multi-stop commute. My city is in the process of constructing its first mass transit project between downtown and its largest neighbour to the south and chose the end point, and only stop in that city, as the fucking airport!, miles from any homes. Place some of the blame where it belong, the municipal planners who make decisions based on kickbacks instead of public benefit. If it make it more palatable for you, envision them as 'obese'.
So, in other words, Americans don't want public transportation, they'd rather drive. Because if they wanted public transportation, the cities would be designed around it. Public transportation isn't exactly something new. Rapid transit options have existed for well over 100 years. The oldest "subway" in America was built in 1850, and almost all major American cities had some form of "subway" by 1950. If American cities were "designed around cars" it's not because they were the only option. They could have been designed around public transportation. If they really weren't, that's because fat Americans won't use them.
The simple fact is that Americans don't use them, perferring to drive to a parking garage and waddle over to the elevator rather than having to walk an amazing five meters from a bus stop to a building. Because that might involve stairs. (Except, of course, that America has laws requiring that all buildings provide non-stair access. We can't have fat Americans walking up stairs, after all! Got to provide that elevator!)
Face it, it's a lazy American problem. Kjella is 100% correct. If Americans wanted public transportation, they could have made it. They'd rather drive and waddle than be forced to walk down a city block.
Re:in comparison to....
by
jawtheshark
·
· Score: 1
Yes, and? Is that a problem? I use Google calculator all the time, and just forgot to "Imperialize" the kilometers. Divide by 1.6 and you're fine...
-- Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
If only American road builders would add shoulders to roads...
Seriously, most of the back streets were I live are simply unsafe for cyclists. There's no sidewalk (and, no, cyclists wouldn't be there), there's no shoulder, there's no bike lane. So instead you have cyclists who have to ride in the single lane with no room to pull over when yet another obese SUV driver forces them off the road since he's too busy talking on his cellphone to bother paying attention to little people on bicycles.
It's obvious America is the most obese nation on Earth when you try and get around without driving. It almost seems like the roads are explicitly designed to prevent people from biking or walking down them. No sidewalks, no bike lanes, no driver education on sharing the road with cyclists...
The Toyota Corolla has a standard 1.3L Engine. It is built in Kentucky and millions of them are on US roads. I bought one for my wife two years ago.
Re:in comparison to....
by
ChrisGilliard
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
It's different. Most places in America, you can't live normally without driving. Sad, perhaps, but true.
First of all, I totally disagree with the premise of this post. Cars are a good thing. They allow people to travel and get a broader perspective, enjoy time with their families, communte to work, be more productive, etc. But enough of stating the obvious. It's true that they emit CO2, but were quickly solving this problem as we speak and hybrids cut the emissions down by a lot. I would not be surprised to see electric cars that actually work in the next 10 - 20 years.
...because you're probably the most obese people on earth, which doesn't get any better by you sitting in cars and at desks all day.
Incorrect. See this URL: here there are more overweight people in the Middle East, Latin America, and Easter Europe.
Secondly, you don't have much of public transportation because noone would use it.
Again wrong. In big cities like San Francisco, New York, etc...many people do use public transportation. Maybe the reason many americans don't is because they live in rural areas. It just doesn't make sense to have the rapid transit go out to the ranch. With such a huge amount of land and 300 million people, it's pretty spread out.
Our population density is *half* of yours, we pay about $6/gallon already.
Not sure where you live, but many countries tax gasoline excessively. That is most likely why you pay more for gas. This is very unfortunate, but it's not American's fault that your government is doing this.
Granted. But it's not something individual Americans can choose not to be a part of.
Nonsense. The majority of people could easily switch to a non auto-centric lifestyle, if they actually wanted to. Problem is they don't want to. Oh, they say we'd be better off, but they don't want to give up their car. They always have an exuse, regardless of the real necessity of their car. And then we have the folks who swear up and down that the most important right we hold as americans is that of car ownership and that they'd die to protect it.
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Those cities that had some form of "subway" from the 1850's on, it wasn't an expression of 'want' then? Was it forced on the Fats? And Americans have been a nation of fast food obese for those 100 years? I see. Timelines appear to be a stumbling block here. The criteria used in decisions made based to meet the needs of North American cities in the Fifties - much smaller, seemingly enough oil to last an eternity, no environmental impact of note, plenty of land for expansion - were very much different than today's or their contemporaries in Europe. The world's population has quadrupled since. Building around the convenience of cars was the best option save for the very few large metro areas where it became impractical. "The simple fact.." is too many people here seem incapable dealing with anything more complex than simplistic ad hominem characterizations.
Re:in comparison to....
by
Knuckles
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
In fact, everything there seems to be designed for driving.
The car culture creates a pull towards car-friendlyness. If people have cars, distances grow. Studies at the Technical University Vienna have shown that the average time we spend for transportation is pretty much constant. If you can go faster, you go farther.
Therefor in a car culture, the shops move to the outskirts where they have less costs, and get away with it because people can drive there for the cheaper prices. The shops offer bigger and bigger packages of household goods, to be chearper, and because people drive there as rarely as possible. The parking lots are huge. The local shops go bankrupt. Suddenly you can't go shopping without a car.
Other example: cars make streets deserted. If people use cars a lot in a city, it gets lonely on the streets. Instead of walking together, people drive by each other. In addition, the noise makes the residents turn away from the street. They close windows, try to be in rooms away from the street. Given time, the architecture will change and turn inwards, presenting cold walls to the outside, with only bathroom and hallway windows. The bed and living room windows face to a courtyard or similar. These changes slowly make the streets uncomfortable and possibly dangerous, and gradually more people switch to cars. Soon there is no space for pedestrians any more, let alone a sidewalk, or anything to walk to.
-- "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
Re:in comparison to....
by
micler
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
If one thing really annoys me, it's people bashing Americans as if they're all the same.
Yes, Americans, in general, are like the whole world thinks they are. I know. I live in America. But this amounts to blind discrimination--like happened in the US to blacks before the civil rights movement. Maybe some blacks were like the majority of Southern whites thought they were. Definitely some--more than a few--Americans are like the majority of Europeans think they are. The point is, though, some aren't. Some people in the US drive SUVs because they know that the rest of the population do, and if they ever get hit by one, they want to survive. No matter what the reason for there being a lack of public transportation, the fact is nobody can use it if it's not there. For Pete's sake, only 51% of the voters elected Bush, and the rest who voted for Kerry, even if they didn't really think much of him, knew he was the only real alternative. Not all Americans are fat, either. We don't choose our country of birth; therefore, do not prejudge based on it.
China's Linux policy is part of their strategic growth plan. A nationally funded company develops a flavor of Linux that's very suitable for Chinese gov't use. Microsoft is an American Company, and there's no reason not to believe that they will never help the American government to spy on Chinese government. Linus provides a level-plane playing field for the Chinese government to have control over their own software. Given that Chinese state controlled companies and governments are the largest buyer of legal software, a 27% increase is very reasonable.
I doubt that you will see MS sales increase by that much, though. MS has been trying for year to crack China's market, but they are not successful. The main reason is that MS generate most of the revenue from OEM-bundled OS sales, and most CHinese people still buy white-box PC and get pirated OS. Even with brand-name PC's you can get them with Linux pre-installed, and go home and wipe it clean with a pirated Windows.
Re:in comparison to....
by
onebecoming
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I'm not sure it's fair to say gasoline is taxed excessively (outside America); automobile use, and indirectly gasoline consumption, is tied to a lot of negative side effects, not least the development of sprawl in the built environment. Sprawl is massively inefficient and unsustainable beyond a certain point. "Massively inefficient" not only because of the costs of transportation, but also because urban living simply conserves more energy in terms of heating and cooling (think surface area to volume ratio) and because, in general, an urban environment allows one to take advantage of efficiencies of scale and economies of agglomeration hard to find in rural areas.
And as for unsustainable, you ever try driving on an L.A. freeway at rush hour? Contrast that to New York's transportation system, which actually operates at peak efficiency during rush hour. It's true that in L.A., at least you get to sit inside your own private space while you wait... but you're still stuck. Point is, L.A. can't take any more, but New York has room to grow.
Taxing gasoline may not be "excessive" in the sense that we'd do better to discourage problems like these from developing, but as disincentives go, a gas tax is fairly roundabout. In Britain, I believe (someone please correct me), I heard they're introducing a per-mile taxation system, using GPS, based on traffic flow and the marginal costs "to society" of your one additional automobile. California's eventually going to have to implement something similar, I fear.
Who's to blame? The self-destructive modernist attitudes of early twentieth-century automobile companies and of President Eisenhower, who built the interstate freeway system, encouraging Americans to build out, is a quick answer. There's another perspective entirely--that sprawl is the American way of life, and we Americans do what we please, and if we have to bleed oil and get immobilized in traffic twice a day for the sake of our American lifestyle, then so be it, energy efficiency be damned. That's an argument I don't want to get into.
Re:in comparison to....
by
mrchaotica
·
· Score: 1
I'm not even sure you could find a car in the U.S. that has a motor less than 1.8 liters.
Chevrolet Aveo: 1.6L
Dodge Caliber: 1.8L
Honda Civic: 1.8L
Honda Civic Hybrid: 1.3L
Honda Fit: 1.5L
Honda Insight: 1.0L
Hyundai Accent: 1.6L (I drive one of these)
Kia Rio: 1.6L
Lotus Elise: 1.8L
Mini Cooper: 1.6L
Nissan Sentra: 1.8L
Nissan Versa: 1.8L
Scion xA: 1.5L
Scion xB: 1.5L (my dad drives one of these)
Toyota Yaris: 1.5L
Toyota Corolla: 1.8L
Toyota Prius: 1.5L
Note that these are all current-model cars; there's even a wider variety of used cars available. Also, some efficient cars -- such as the diesel Volkswagens -- aren't listed because they've got slightly bigger engines (1.9L in the VWs' case).
--
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Re:in comparison to....
by
mrchaotica
·
· Score: 1
The 10 minute walk to/from public transportation actually makes a difference.
For me it's probably more like a 2 hour walk, because -- like the vast majority of Americans -- I live in the suburbs (and I'm a college student living with my parents, so I have no choice in the matter, thankyouverymuch!). The nearest bus station is something like 8 miles away.
I am not overweight at all, let alone obese, but public transportation is still not a reasonable option for me. In fact, because of the particular side of the city I live on and the way MARTA runs, if I wanted to use the train I would have to drive in an entirely different direction to get to the train station, effectively traveling along two legs of a triangle instead of the hypotenuse.
Believe me, I would love to not have to drive 20 miles to school every day, and in fact I'm trying to get a job to earn enough money to move out and get an apartment near campus. But frankly, commuting -- even at $2.50 a gallon -- is cheaper (it makes me glad I drive an efficient economy car, though).
--
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Re:in comparison to....
by
JonahDark1
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The oil companies and the tire companies basically bribed/paid the cities with great public transit systems to dismantle them around 1950. LA is a good example of this. It used to have one of the best public transit systems in the country. Now it's so spread out public transit is useless.
Because if they wanted public transportation, the cities would be designed around it.
Well, yes and no. This is true today because they all have been brainwashed. In the 1880ies, Los Angeles had an electrified tramway network, and by the 1920ies, it had 2,000 km tramway tracks, compared to 300 in a European city like Vienna.
Today, Vienna is a tenth the size of LA, and still has nearly 300 km, plus 60 km underground and 650 km bus lines. LA has had no tramway at all from 1963 to 1990, and today has 90 km, plus a 30 km underground. Didn't find info on buses.
What happened: in Europe, the tramway companies were bought by the local communities pretty quickly and used in a pretty organized manner to steer city development. In the US, the tramway companies of course remained private, and bought land, laid tracks, and developed the land along the tracks, creating the first urban sprawls. This first led to the boom in the 20ies, but when cars became affordable the tramway companies had problems and were bought by the oil and car industry. Once they 0wn3d the tramways, they closed down whole networks. In LA they ripped out the tracks a local tramway company had already laid into the open land, expecting future growth.
A history of tramways in the Wiener Zeitung, a reputable Austrian newspaper, german.
-- "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
Re:in comparison to....
by
mrchaotica
·
· Score: 1
However, there's a lot more to a major industrial economy than cars. A lot more. And I don't think you realize the impact upon your lifestyle that higher energy cost is going to have. Virtually everything you buy involves power and petroleum products (plastics, for example) somewhere in the manufacturing chain.
Not to mention the distribution chain, where the vast majority of goods are shipped via truck (because even though trains are more efficient, and could be made even more so by electrifying the rails, the infrastructure was developed to favor trucks).
--
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Ignoring your circular argument between your first and second points....
Our population density is *half* of yours...
Really? I guess your math skills are also half of ours. Let's see
US land area: 9,161,923 sq km
US Population: 298,444,215 (July 2006 est.)
US density: 32.57 people/sq km
EU area: 3,976,372 sq km
EU population: 456,953,258 (July 2006 est.)
EU density: 114.92 people/sq km
In case you still can't figure that out, the EU is almost four times denser than the US. Gee, I wonder why there's more public transportation there...
Re:in comparison to....
by
ScrewMaster
·
· Score: 1
I have my fingers crossed.
Yes. Me too.
-- The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Re:in comparison to....
by
ScrewMaster
·
· Score: 1
Not to mention the distribution chain
No, let's mention it, and you're right. Transportation costs are going up. I know the vending machines at the company where I work are getting more expensive. The dude who refills them twice a week said it's because they're passing on increased fuel costs to their customers. Of course, all of their suppliers are doing the same thing, and so on up the line.
I dunno if converting the rail system to electric would be any more efficient than the diesel-electrics we have now. I mean, power production itself (particularly if from fossil-fueled plants) is very inefficient, and if you factor in losses from thousands of miles of electrified rails essentially serving as long-distance transmission lines... well. You can't run them at megavolt levels to reduce I^2R losses because they're on the ground. Besides, per ton hauled, diesel-electric is really very attractive from an efficiency standpoint. Has diesel trucking beat all hollow.
Maybe if we'd gone on with the rail system rather than build the interstate highways we'd be in a better position now to haul goods to where they need to be without trucks. But we didn't.
-- The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Re:in comparison to....
by
advocate_one
·
· Score: 1
Well, with my current job I have to do 100km/day too... That adds up, especially because I was dumb enought to buy a sports car six years ago. (When prices were still acceptable and I only had to do 60km/day) With the fuel efficiency of about 25MPG my car has, it hurts... badly... (I manage to get it up to 27.6MPG by driving like a grampa)
so you've never considered trading it in for something more fuel efficient then??? or getting a job closer to home, or moving closer to your existing job...
-- Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
Re:in comparison to....
by
phantomfive
·
· Score: 1
I can't speak for everyone, but a lot of people I know believe it is bad for kids to grow up in a house without a big yard. Yards are great for playing sports (even if it's small, kids are small too so it is usually fine), digging, growing things, exploring, climbing trees, all these wonderful childhood activities. If you live in an apartment, we have the idea that all the poor kid can do is sit inside and watch TV. It's just not healthy. That is why people want a big yard.
-- Qxe4
Re:in comparison to....
by
dalutong
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Interesting. I grew up in one of the world's largest cities. Fortunately, it was a city with parks. We played there.
--
What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
Re:in comparison to....
by
jawtheshark
·
· Score: 1
I'm going to quit my job... Yes... However, moving closer to my current job would be impossible considering the huge property prices around here. Getting something more fuel-efficient is another pipe dream. If I get (for example) a new Smart Car Diesel, it would only pay off after 10 years or so. (I did the calculation once, but I don't recall the specifics) I'd rather keep my sports car, in that case. After all, for a new car, I'll need higher insurance and a new loan. Stuff that I can forget just now with my current car. The only reason that I can quit my current job is because my wife has a good paying job and she does 100km a day too... Again: moving closer is impossible due to the high property prices. I don't want a mortage for the next 40 years, especially because I'm already 30 years old.
-- Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
The 'president' of China is coming to the US at the end of April, and in anticipation of pressure to accurately value its currency, he is bringing a ton of corporate executives with him to make high-profile deals with US companies.
Hu Jintao is supposed to have dinner with Bill GAtes, and it is expected that the result will be an increased rate of purchase of Windows software by State Owned Enterprises. (I guess it will have to be XP for now).
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Also gas is taxed much more in europe then in the united states. Subtract the taxes and the price per gallon is much closer now isnt it.
Re:in comparison to....
by
advocate_one
·
· Score: 1
sheesh, and there I was thinking slavery had been abolished... welcome to the new slavery... it goes by the name of wage-slavery... they've got you by the short and curlies... and all you can do is keep on working to pay the bills.
-- Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
Re:in comparison to....
by
killjoe
·
· Score: 0, Troll
Now that we own iraq and soon iran we will be able have even more then 40% of our oil be "domestic".
-- evil is as evil does
Re:in comparison to....
by
jawtheshark
·
· Score: 1
Tell me something new:-(
-- Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
Re:in comparison to....
by
MadUndergrad
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Gore also wanted to impose a $0.50 per gallon gas tax. Personally, I think that that is the best idea I've heard from a politician in a very long time. That would have the effect of lowering the demand for gas, thus hastening the adoption of policies and practices that would reduce our need for gas. It would also be a good source of revenue for our government which has the fiscal acumen of a flock of teenage girls with daddy's credit card.
This depends what country in Europe you live in. They all do not have uniformly good public transport.
I lived in Germany, which is head and shoulders above most countries - and even in suburban areas, I could get to a train station on bike within 0-15 minutes. Only the most rural areas had problems (which may contain quite a bit of area but the minority of population).
If you choose where you live correctly, even in a relatively rural area to get cheaper rent, you should have no problem getting around without a car - just train and bike (or walking even).
The other factor that helps is that you can do most of your shopping in close proximity/walking/biking distance to you. Everything tends to be clustered closer together - the grocery store, bank, postal office, and apothecary within 500 feet of each other is not uncommon. Plus, because of zoning - they are close to residential areas.
In America, zoning laws tend to have commercial property (stores) completely separate/away from residential areas. Residential areas will be lonely seas without a store in sight. This type of design creates a car culture.
I live in south-eastern PA, pretty well populated, but still, to go grocery shopping and all that other stuff, I have to drive from one end of town to another, sometimes taking a good 1 1/2 hours IN A CAR just to get everywhere on DAILY errands, nothing special.
Europe has it good compared to how we set it up for ourselves.
I thought Bush went to Iraq to preserve cheap domestic oil prices, among other (similar) reasons.
Re:in comparison to....
by
jawtheshark
·
· Score: 1
(Country=Luxembourg)
It all depends where you work. I've got a train station within 5minutes of biking, I've got a bus station within 5 minutes of walking.
Alas, neither of them help me, because I don't work in the capital.
As for grocery shopping: it's one of the things I always defend US-ians.... Frankly: If I go Gorcery shopping I take four to five crates of mineral water with me. One or two crates of beer. (It barely goes in my sports car's trunk) Frankly, I don't see how I would transport that to my home. That's only the drinking stuff, I'd have more than a couple of bags with normal groceries. For such things a car is actually useful!:-D
-- Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
"Not sure where you live, but many countries tax gasoline excessively. That is most likely why you pay more for gas. This is very unfortunate, but it's not American's fault that your government is doing this."
This might work to the advantage of (mostly European) countries. Europe, through additional costs imposed by taxation on fuel, is used to higher fuel costs than the USA and city planning to some extent takes account of this. Also a smaller proportion of the cost of the fuel is due to the actual hydrocarbons so a doubling of the hydrocarbon cost will have a smaller effect on the overall price than in the USA and be less of a shock to the system. In theory the tax take could even be reduced (if other sources of government revenue were available) to further soften the blow.
The flip side is that higher costs mean that European cars tend to be more fuel efficient than the average of the US car fleet so there is less opportunity for making the overall fleet more efficient than in the USA (the number of SUV registrations is down in the USA, so this seems to be happening now after years of the average US car fleet economy getting worse). This having been said a German company plans on selling a two seater from 2009 for about 10,000 Euros which is reputed to be able to do around 150 mpg.
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Norway != EU.
Re:in comparison to....
by
zippthorne
·
· Score: 1
Part of it is a zoning problem. For some reason, many communities for many years have designated specific "commercial" zones or "residential" zones, and never the twain did meet. Obviously, it makes more sense to create mixed zones to allow shops to spring up in walking distance of the houses. In fact, this is starting to become in vogue again, albeit in upscale condo communities, but that's still progress, right?
You forget one more point -- Americans have left the cities for the suburbs (and now the "ex"urbs) over the past 50 years. American's are big on property and personal space.
It's about getting away from the percieved increased crime of urban areas and - unfortunately for some - certain racial/ethnic groups. As those same problems/people move outwards as well (not that they are connected in any way) the people also try to move further out, generally using beuracratic or financial barriers to try and slow folks from following them.
I grew up in China and got very used to always been within a couple of feet of someone. When I came to America in '99 I was chastised regularly for walking or standing too close to someone.
That is a cultural differnce and has little to do with Americans wanting big back yards. It's like people greeting by giving a kiss on each cheek rather than shaking hands. There are some cultures that find the amount of space Amercan's generally allow to be too little.
I also noticed the envy people had with large yards -- something you can only get far away from cities (for affordable prices.) I think some of this is the "keeping up with the jones'" effect -- everyone in america feels they are middle class, and so no one accepts that they can't afford a house with a yard. so they find a place where they can.
This probably has an effect, but I think for some people it is just a matter of preference. A large yard for gardening, entertaining, playing, ect is more important than being close to a residental center. Plus, a large yard is more enjoyable when you're away from the noise and air pollution of a nearby street.
If the owner can afford the extra gas to drive anywhere, buying in the outskits of town where prices from homes are cheaper just makes sense.
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
False dichotomy. Communism and capitalism are two weakly defined economic systems, neither of which are implemented in the world right now. We have many and varied economic systems on the planet and many operate better than the delinquent system in place in the USA.
I don't mind a little criticism, but I get tired of hearing what is essentially a bunch of name calling. Just because America isn't popular this year, doesn't give you the right to act like a little bitch.
Obesity is a problem in America more than elsewhere because *wealth* is *common* in America and food is relatively cheap. You can pretend to be disgusted, but if you had the opportunity to be in our shoes, you would take it.
We drive cars because 1. it is fun 2. although gas prices have risen, they are still low (especially when compared to european gas prices) 3. there are insufficient bus routes to most suburbs in America.
Number 3 could probably be fixed, but number 1 and 2 keeps us from caring enough to do it. The fact is we have a (relatively new) great highway system extending from end to end of the continent, so why not use it?
>And T.V. I can't remember what the exact numbers are, but the average household has the T.V. on for >something like 8 hours. But when you live in the sub/ex-urbs... what else is there to do? You can play in >parks, I guess. But you can't really walk anywhere else.
*yes*, the suburbs are boring as hell.
Parents move to the suburbs because they think it will be better to start a new family there... *wrong*. Since there's nothing for kids to *do* in the burbs, they tend to watch tv, do drugs, and get cheerleaders pregnant. It's even worse in rural areas. Methamphetamines have an extremely high incidence in the boonies, since.. what else are people going to do for fun?
Yet parents continue to move their families out to the suburbs, take hour or more commutes to work, so that they can neglect their new family in a suburban desert...
The burbs are a nice relatively affordable place for an adult to live, but you shouldn't try to raise a family there. That said, the schools often suck in urban areas...
We have many and varied economic systems on the planet and many operate better than the delinquent system in place in the USA.
Name just one. And if you do, tell me how they deal with immigration.
-- 3 things about computers: they're alive, they're self-aware, and they hate your guts.
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Still far from it, if that was true I wouldn't be complaining, but Shell for example has a 18 eurocent per liter difference on the price without taxes between Europe and the USA
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Just thought I should mention it before you pull a "Mars Climate Orbiter"...
-2008
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
"electrified rails" usually doesn't mean that the rails themselves are what gets electrified. The public health risks alone are enough to keep that from happening (not to mention the tracks' conductivity can be used for more critical purposes such as switching) The power is usually strung above the train. See Amtrak's Acela for a domestic example, japan's bullet train for a fast example.. (supposedly acela is capable of higher speeds or somesuch, but when they say, "Acela was built on is own all-new track to enable high speeds" what they mean is, "Acela shares track with freight and municipal electric trains for most of its length"
Americans have left the cities for the suburbs (and now the "ex"urbs) over the past 50 years.
The middle class began moving out of the cities as soon as soon as commuter rail service, steam and electric lines, made it feasible. 1880-1900.
Sears, Roebuck sold suburban kit homes out of a catalog from 1911 to 1933.
$700 for a summer cottage, $4400 for a substantial colonial style house, in 1927. Sears would finance construction at 6%, no money down. 300,000 were built and many survive.
Gas and rubber rationing in World War Two was essential to keep the suburban commuter, whether skilled labor or white-collar worker, on the road.
We have hybrids at less than 25 MPG in the states. Do you have some fuel-efficiency-boosting aura over there in Europe? Our Mustangs barely get 7 MPG, and most SUVs under 15.
Right. Of course, this way of zoning was done with the car in mind. It's mostly the fault of the misguided modernists around Le Corbusier and their Charta of Athens (1937)
-- "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I think now is a good time to point out that there are people who could barely survive without driving, and for this one reason:
We're in the middle of FUCKING NOWHERE.
I live in northwestern colorado, and where I live, the nearest large department store and large grocery store is a 1 hour drive away. The nearest "good" hospital and Sam's Club (bulk shopping center), mall, and most other conveinecnces, is 2 hours (unless the road is closed, which then it's over 3).
Although most people are in big cities, and that is who you are referring to, there are a HUGE AMOUNT of Americans who don't have everything need within walking distance. For example, if my car broke down, I might be able to get the part, but chances are I'd have to have carparts store ORDER IT (it'd get here tomorrow, but thats beyond the point).
Need a pair of eyeglasses, or did you lens pop out and you can't fix it? 1 hour drive to get to the nearest Walmart. Want some fast food? 1 hour drive to the nearest Mickey D's.
Please realise that our country is enormous compared to yours when it comes to land space.
And according to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_ population_density Which assuming you're in the UK, has 243. Ours is 30. Thats significantly higher than "twice". Everything you need is nearby, and people I've talked to have said they lived less than an hour outside of London, and NEVER HAVE TO GO THERE. How nice that would be.
It gets expensive when you have to drive to buy most of the stuff you live off of.
Except if the government does something about it. Where I live, entering the city with a car costs 2$. Cars are really heavily taxed. There are strict parking rules: e.g. park in an unauthorized space costs 100$. On the other side, public transportation.is good. I take the underground to the ski station during winter and the bus (or bike) to the beach in the summer. I bike to my office in the summer, and sometimes walk (45 min) when the weather allows it. And yet I live in a capital.
The result: I, like many, don't own a car, by choice. And we buy our food from the local grocery shops.
Of course the country is small, but had the government done nothing to fight against car invasion, we would be like any other European town.
Ah by the way, I live in Oslo, Norway. Talk about Quality of Life.
Getting to the public transportation is tiresome because you don't get the exercise of using public transportation. The 10 minute walk to/from public transportation actually makes a difference.
Many places in the US have no public transportation within an hour walk, much less within ten minutes. In areas where there is adequate public transportation (New York City, Boston, etc.), the pre capita tonnage is visibly lower.
Secondly, you don't have much of public transportation because noone would use it.
Wrong. The US has limited public transportation because most of the key nodes in the transportation networks were bought up by General Motors, Goodyear and Standard Oil and dismantled back at the beginning of the 20th Century in an effort to boost demand for their products. Many remaining portions of the nation's public transportation network failed when they were no longer effectively interconnected with the rest of the system.
The task of reestablishing an effective national-scale public transportation network is now such a daunting one that noone is even seriously discussing it. We are not talking about just upgrading bits here and there but about acquiring right-of-ways in heavily populated areas and building the infrastructure from scratch. To get the US back to where it was in the 1920's would be an untertaking of mammoth proportions.
In areas where effective public transportation exists in the US, it is used heavily. In areas where the public transportation consists of a few busses with timetables structured erratically around the schedules of five or six elderly people, no, the systems do not attract many riders.
Now, I am not certain of which country you are from, but I doubt that you built your entire public transportation system in the last couple decades. The cost and difficulty of maintaining and expanding a transportation network in a densly populated area is far less the the cost and difficulty of building one from the ground up.
Other countries cope, if you can't you need to blame something else than geography.
Yes, the blame falls squarely upon the shoulders of unregulated Capitalism and the population's allowing itself to be connned into not protecting vital national assets. The argument that rail transport was passe was pretty convincing several decades ago. ..so convincing that many people are unaware to this day of the true costs of allowing big business to destroy the country's transportation infrastructure.
The problem is not that people do not want good public transportation, but that to build a system to replace cars in many parts of the country seems to be a prohibitively expensive and risky task.
Re:in comparison to....
by
jawtheshark
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, it's called "efficient engines". I've got an Audi TT. Some people argue it's not a sportscar, so I'll give you that. It still is a nice car. It does about 9.5 l/100km, which translates to 24.76MPG.
Still, that thing is a gas guzzler compared to most cars around here.
-- Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
Re:in comparison to....
by
dimension6
·
· Score: 1
You can view information on those homes and some images of all the styles and prices here. It's pretty fascinating, but keep in mind the prices may have increased since 1940.
Dont worry!
You'll just invade Iran and take the Oil that the Chinese want.
Then you can pay $1.00 and buy a bigger car.
Slight problem here is that china has a few more modern weapons
then the third world stuff you used to fighting.
Might be a bit of hassle trying to kill them all, But if the Oils worth it you
might get lucky.
-- It Seems I've developed an aversion to proprietary software
In Switzerland there is a specific government policy that almost all people have to be served by public transportation. The population is very dispersed (population 8million, but largest city is only 400 thousand) in villages and small towns, but the transport system is extensive and effective. Not particularly expensive either. For EUR2k you can buy unlimited use of all the public transport in the country for one year (with exclusion of one or two mountain-railways and ski-lifts and the like!).
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Don't make assumptions. He's from Norway. Density: 14
About half the density. And yet they manage public transportation just fine.
Yes, rural America probably doesn't have good public transit options. However, urban America also doesn't have good public transit options. And most Americans live in the cities - that's why they're "urban" and the rural areas are "rural."
Very much agreed. I have lived most of my life in Vienna, Austria, and only ca. 50% of households own a car there. And guess what, you don't need one either:) Now I'm in Berlin. The city is so big area-wise, still by far not finished after the big changes in the 90ies, and the municipality more or less bankrupt. I couldn't get anything done here without a car, and the company pays for it anyway, so...
One of the reasons why US cities are so bad in terms of public transport is in my other post
-- "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
Re:in comparison to....
by
Sax+Maniac
·
· Score: 1
Gas has gone up to about $3.80 per gallon for a short time, and it's hovering around $2.60 here now. Nobody has changed any habits at all. (Well, I lied. I got a Discover Gas Card so I get 5% off now.)
If both a short-term $2 hike and a long-term $1 hike doesn't affect behavior, what makes you think 50 cents will?
-- I can explanate how to administrate your network. You must configurate and segmentate it, so it can computate.
Re:in comparison to....
by
MadUndergrad
·
· Score: 1
From what I've heard, SUV's are becoming less popular and they can't keep hybrids on the lots. I can't cite any hard numbers right now, but I do seem to remember that when Katrina brought prices up, people did try to drive less to save money, and SUV's took a hit to their popularity. I would expect that an extra 50 cents would make that effect more pronounced.
1. a point about more efficient car is a good one andi fully agree; 2. most europeans have VERY different view on a term "house" than americans. for americans, moving to new are isn't something extraordinary - probably the fact that most of families at one point immigrated anyway helps somehow. and the "love for the land" might be even stronger in latvia than in most of the europe.
here, settling in one place is the goal of most people. families have houses over hundred years old, that have been built by their grand-grand parents. houses where everything has it's tale, places where giant trees have been planted to celebrate some ancestors birth. where some relative still can tell stories about other buildings in the "yard". that's probably also historical thing, affected by difficulties to get the land (what has been less of a problem in america). i am sure there is some research about this;)
-- Rich
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
So what's it going to take to force you to care?
Re:in comparison to....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Americans care more about having individual transport to get around, which means cars. That's what it takes to do our daily routine. It's also cultural thing. If one doesn't have the means for a car, they'll just use public transport.
Hmmm interesting
by
Spy+der+Mann
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
In a country where megacorporations cannot lobby or pressure the government to make certain choices, the natural result is that the government chooses the cheapest product. In the case of Linux, this also turns to be a much safer product than the one most used (Windows). I'm afraid this will give chinese hackers and spammers an advantage over the US.
I wonder now if choosing the right OS is becoming a matter of national security. In any case, I really hope this news gives a nudge to the US, saying "see? The chinese use it, why shouldn't we?"
Re:Hmmm interesting
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Open Source is based on communist philosophy so it's not that much of a stretch to find that communists like it!
I'm afraid this will give chinese hackers and spammers an advantage over the US.
Yeah, if you think that it's an advantage that there are more viruses, more rootkits and more owned Linux based systems around the world.
Re:Hmmm interesting
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Yeah, if you think that it's an advantage that there are more viruses, more rootkits and more owned Linux based systems around the world.
Right... What kind of drugs are you on and why are you not sharing?
In any case, I really hope this news gives a nudge to the US, saying "see? The chinese use it, why shouldn't we?"
Not really. If anything, this could give Microsoft more ammo to tell the government Linux is wrong. "China uses Linux, and China is oppressive, therefore, Linux is helping oppress people. That's why we should use Windows instead." I'm not saying that Microsoft would directly say that, but I'm betting Microsoft will at least try to use this news to their advantage.
I don't think so. Alot of goverments around the world are not using windows. Most are US allies. If Microsoft were to bring up such a point, it would quickly lose ground because it has no logical base to build upon. The only thing it could bring (with a push from mass media of course) is a general emotion that linux is somehow evil. Even that isn't a probability, because I don't think corporations that have interests in linux, like IBM, would just sit around for that to happen...
Oh yea, USA loves to think like that. "China's doing it so it must be a good idea."
Re:Hmmm interesting
by
Jetekus
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
True, but at least megacorporations don't randomly throw people in prison (e.g. Thet Win Aung)...
And when megacorps behave badly at least there are people trying to do something about it - most of the Chinese people at my university (Cambridge, UK) don't seem to be aware / care about the terrible human rights breaches that go on back home.
In a country where megacorporations cannot lobby or pressure the government to make certain choices
China joined the WTO. Because of this, non-Chinese companies now have a lot more power than they used to (regarding doing business in China). And don't believe for a second that corps like Wal-Mart have no say in Chinese government policy.
Re:Hmmm interesting
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
If you don't think that Linux we be more exploited as it becomes more popular, then you don't really understand how this all works. It's IMPOSSIBLE to completely secure a computer yet still provide all the services people expect. When stupid consumers get a hold of Linux, it will be as full of holes as Windows because the users will explictly open those holes, fail to patch holes as they are found, etc.
From the article: "2005 saw a steady growth in the China Linux market, brought about mainly by the huge volume of government procurements and large-scale SCO Unix replacement by major banks and industrial projects such as Telecommunication and Internet cafes."
So I think they mean there's a lot of SCO Unix implementations being replaced by Linux. Yay.
Yeah, linux is all SCO code. I read that in the news somewhere...
Re:piracy?
by
slashbob22
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The AC is being funny. If this was the Music Industry, their statement would be something to the extent that the music sales were up, but it would be up twice as high if it weren't for the pirates. You can't pirate GPL software, but you can make a joke on why the numbers aren't higher.
As my Karma Burns: "Burn, Baby Burn, Flames are Getting Higher" - Shawdow Warrior
-- Proof by very large bribes. QED.
Chump change
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
IDC forecasts China's Linux market will grow at a CAGR of 34.0% from 2006 to 2010, and reach $51.1 mln by 2010
Imressive growth numbers, but a 51.1 million dollar market is puny. ( Especially, if you consider that there's 1.2 Billion people in China. ) Hopefully, it'll grow large enough to warrant the large investment needed to market over there.
You see, for a small company such as mine, I don't have the resources to park there until the market is large enough to support my operations - unlike IBM, MS, SAP, etc... That's were globalization fails. Small companies can't compete with the large multinationals. That's kind of the whole falacy with the globalization raising everyone'sstandard of living.
There's only so much inputs (oil, raw materials, etc...) to go around. Think I'm wrong? Well, I guess the markets are wrong too. Oil, steel, and other raw materials and fuel prices have been skyrocketing (Because the whole world wants to live like the US). But my market is just here in the S.E. US and I don't have the resources to expand into China. So, my costs go up, but my revenues stay the same. My demand curve is quite, how do the ecomonists say it?, elastic. I can't raise prices. But the multinationals, can go and move into China or whereeever and take advantage of the lower labor costs. The result, small entrepreneurial companies can't survive and the multinationals will take over everything. That's just the way it is.
I'm all ears for anyone who says the a small company can survive in this environment - please post solution.
Also, if we in the US are using 25% of the resources (inputs) and we're only 5% of the world's population, how can 100% of the world live like US? They can't. everyone's standard of living will have to be reduced (I'm trying - I'm using much less fuel and food!) or there's going to be very rich and the other 5 billion people will live in poverty -like now.
How is a small company to survive? Many industries do not have economies of scale, if so, corporations have a very small advantage over you, and in most cases you actually hold the upper hand, as you can be more responsive to consumer demands.
Also, globalization decreases the costs of goods, so you can have larger margins, and if a corporation can out produce you, you can always resell there products with better customer service and marketing(retail).
You referred to offshore labor that only involves the manufacturing sector, which even without globalization contains significant economies of scale (R&D, marketing, so on). Even so, you can easily obtain a manufacturing contract from china, and I know of many small businesses that do.
And another thing, if you truly cannot compete, finds something else to do. Raising prices and penalizing efficient industry is a massive transfer of wealth from the poor (IE customers) to the rich and middle class (you).
Also, if we in the US are using 25% of the resources (inputs) and we're only 5% of the world's population, how can 100% of the world live like US? They can't. everyone's standard of living will have to be reduced (I'm trying - I'm using much less fuel and food!)
I agree with the reduction in standard of living. Less fuel, food (and reduced power usage) will help out a lot.
As for the work thing, the best resource I can suggest is opening up an Indian office and hiring a few people here. Now, if the Indian government made it easier for foreigners to get Indian work visas....
Keep in mind that you don't need to just park here. Sell to the local market, and use the same resources to grow in the US market too.
I'm all ears for anyone who says the a small company can survive in this environment - please post solution.
*shrug* We do....
We're a small company. Very small. We manufacture "green" surfactants, organic fertilizer, energy drinks, and license/develop our proprietary remediation technology.
Our website is crapped up at the moment, and we have a very small marketing staff. Strangely, however, 80%+ of our business is overseas, either in terms of sourcing materials or actually selling product. Our primary customers are located in Europe, the Middle East, and S. America. We're discussing operations elsewhere, as well; our business is expanding. Furthermore, when we look for suppliers and distributors, we don't restrict ourselves to our region of the US; we look everywhere. Part of this is because we've got someone who is _very_ good at securing low shipping rates, but a larger part of it is that we look for business of a similar size (or larger) than ourselves internationally.
There are plenty of small companies (in China, in Europe (especially Northern Europe), in S. America, in India, in Africa) and a few larger companies who _love_ to cooperate with us, because we can reap the same benefits the multinations you refer to can.
Printing costs, for example, in the UAE are incredibly low. You can produce pallets worth of marketing materials for a fraction of the cost here, and if you're shipping product over there you can bring inputs/marketing materials back on the return trip.
*shrug*.... the multinationals really aren't that scary. For the most part, local officials abroad _hate_ multinationals. Everytime we've partnered up with a larger company (who generally does try to screw with us), the local officials abroad firmly take our side. Even better, the level of middle management that multinationals often place abroad are incredibly incompentant. Of course, this probably isn't true for Microsoft's China office and the like; but I'm not sure I'd worry about some U.S. conglomerate chemical company's representatives in, say, Austria. We fly over our founders/top execs, they send their vp of so and so regional manager. And in the end, we get the contract.
I will say that it has a lot to do with what you do. Who you market to, where you produce things, etc, etc. . . . But don't be afraid to search out companies your size, and hell, even in your business abroad. You might be able to bring something to the table (captial, technology, commitment of resources, even an innovative marketing strategy *shrug*) that they would be happy to partner with you on, and if you're afraid of (Insert Multinational Here), they are five times as afraid. Nobody wants their local shop to face Walmart. Nobody wants their local soft drink manufacturer to face Coca Cola.
Abroad, you have allies you'd never suspect. Finding them if the problem.
But what do I know:) I have no idea what you do. . .
-- WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
I agree with the reduction in standard of living. Less fuel, food (and reduced power usage) will help out a lot.
Capitalism resolves these kinds of issues with efficancy. Look at the recent popularity of hybrids in the U.S. Combine hybrids with expensive (but very light) composite materials, not to mention smaller engines, and you've got SUVs that get 40 MPG (the lexus hybrid SUV gets low 30s, IIRC).
In the intermediate term, it looks like the American solution to fuel constraints is going to be BioFuel (no, not corn based ethanol, that's a dead end). Furthermore, we can get far more efficent in terms of energy usage, and there's nothing like gradually increase energy prices to get the free market to build those kinds of solutions. Hell, the electric company in my area is offering serious credits on your bills if you switch to fluroscent lighting, and acheive a certain level of home insulation. Not to mention how much they love you if you install some kind of renewable and sell energy back to the grid (they pay you for it !). We preformed some serious upgrades on our office space (in terms of efficancy), and not only did we save the money back that we spent, the power company credited us the majority of the costs.
The only one I'm not concerned at all about is food. The tragedy with food is not limited supply, in the huge amount of waste out there, and the inequitable distribution. A lot of this has to do with western farm subsidies. When a peasant Ethiopian farmer _personally_ asks you why the west must subsidize farming, and _personally_ asks you why the west would keep the global supply price of corn so low that he can't profitable sell his corn.... well, it gnaws on your brain. There's no reason the 3rd world can't produce agriculture. They can; there are intelligent people there, and with low labor prices agriculture takes very little in capital costs. However, if us in the "developed" world refuse to buy non-domestic food products for prices greater than 20% of real cost, they can't export to us.
Go tour rural africa, or south america. The biggest complaint you'll hear is not, "Why doesn't the west provide more development aid?". The biggest complaint you'll hear is, "Why doesn't the west want to buy our (corn/coffee/cotton/fruit/whatever).
That's shameful.
-- WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
Mankind's heat output in the forseeable future is neglible, including extreme possibilities like global nuclear war.
What you mean is to discontinue the use of fossil fuels. A more refined way of looking at is to insure that our energy sources are carbon neutral.
BioFuel is carbon neutral, and doesn't require us to replace our existing energy infrastructure. In the long run, nuclear (fission/fusion) and solar can provide unlimited amounts of energy.
The path of utilizing less energy is a dead end. We need to a)utilize energy efficently, and b) insure that our energy generation does not substantially damage the environment. Rapidly switching to carbon neutral energy sources is a big part of this, and if fossil fuel prices continue to rise, it'll be inevitable. There's nothing wrong with using energy; its not a bad word. Fossil fuels are the problem, not thermodynamics.
I, for one, welcome gradual rise of oil prices. I want to see oil at $200 a barrel in 10 years. If we see linear growth of oil prices between now and then, we'll see substantially deployment of BioFuel between now and then.
-- WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
[obligatory joke about how Free Software == communism]
Re:heh
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
China is a more capitalistic than U.S. in theory they call themselves socialists (the chn. gov.) but in pratice, they're just a bunch of fucking pigs who take what they want from socialism and all the rest from capitalism
To me, Free Software looks an awful lot like my political beliefs, libertarian socialism. Communism's too willing to accept a period authoritarianism as a step toward the abolition of the state for my liking.
If you like Linux, it seems like your political system, if you hate it, it seems like the bad guy's political system. I've heard Linux described as socialist, liberterian, capitalist, communist, consumer-oriented, darwinist, populist, green, lean, fat and mean.
Free software relies on copyright, a concept inseparable from personal profit motivation.
Communism relies on authoritarian control, fear motivation.
Free software relies on the generosity/ideals of the copyright holder
Under communism, you have no copyrights (or any other sort of rights) to be generous with, and your ideals had better be the parties ideals or shut up.
Essentially, Free software is a social responsibility ethic within a free enterprise structure. It would never have originated under communism IMO as the fundamental concepts are opposed.
[Free software relies on copyright]
Wrong. Free software is, in fact, more or less the abdication of copyright.
[Communism relies on authoritarian control, fear motivation.]
[Under communism, you have no copyrights (or any other sort of rights) to be generous with, and your ideals had better be the parties ideals or shut up.]
Wrong on both counts, actually, but if you're happy to conflate the dictatorial cults of personality of the so-called communist countries with the works of Marx (which you've clearly never read), feel free. It's your right to be a dumbass.
[Essentially, Free software is a social responsibility ethic within a free enterprise structure. It would never have originated under communism IMO as the fundamental concepts are opposed.]
Are you holding? 'Cos I'm jonesing at the moment.
Note the statement "without violating the software's copyright protection." Apparently the Free Software Foundation disagrees with you about Free Software. The US Federal Court too. Go figure.
...but if you're happy to conflate the dictatorial cults of personality of the so-called communist countries with the works of Marx (which you've clearly never read), feel free.
Communism is as communism does. I have not read books by Marx, but I did read the communist manifesto, which is entirely consistent with the actions of the "so-called communist countries", and if I understand correctly, co-authored by Marx.
I'm not defending communism- all authoritarian structures should be resisted and destroyed. That said, just because one doesn't like Marxism is no excuse to speak ignorantly of it. You clearly don't understand it and haven't taken any steps to educate yourself about it.
1. Communism relies on authoritarian control, fear motivation.
and
2. Under communism, you have no copyrights (or any other sort of rights) to be generous with, and your ideals had better be the parties ideals or shut up.
Since every communist government has been authoritarian, rising to power through violence (as taught by Marx) and communism abolishes personal property (on which copyrights are based), then I stand by my statement that communism and Free software are based on fundamentally opposed ideals. You refered to Free software as the abdication of copyright, which it is not. You seem to be thinking of public domain. Regarding Free Software "You clearly don't understand it and haven't taken any steps to educate yourself about it."
Regarding my knowledge of communism, Marx and Engels wrote in the communist manifesto "It is high time that Communists should openly, in the face of the whole world, publish their views, their aims, their tendencies, and meet this nursery tale of the spectre of communism with a manifesto of the party itself."
Since then I have familiarised myself with what Marx called "their views, their aims, their tendencies", I think I have taken reasonable steps to educate myself. I have also read books by people who have lived under communism.
In any case, Free software relies on having property rights, in particular copyrights, which by definition, is not communism.
Server or Desktop
by
CSHARP123
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
This article do not have much information. Is the server software or the desktop software that is gaining hold there? Linux has always grown in server market. IMHO, Growth in Desktop market will be a great deal as that helps the growth of the Linux much faster than server growth.
I've been in China for three years now and have yet to meet a single person who runs Linux. I'm always interested to meet CS majors here and ask them about their studies. I've yet to find one who runs Linux at home OR for class. Most of them have heard of linux, but none are excited about it. It's a Windows world over here, and I can't see that changing anytime soon.
I'm willing to bet you didn't think this through
by
gd23ka
·
· Score: 1
"I'm willing to bet that MS products grew a lot more than 27%. [My brother] says they're building the equivalent of New York City every year."
What makes you think the chinese build on sand?
How much oil will be used to oppress citizens of China?
How many US cars will be used in the effort of oppressing citizens of China?
How much technology will be used to oppress citizens of the US/whole world?
How much EULAs already oppress citizens of the world making a revenue stream to a few rich people in the US?
How does keeping that sort of a revenue stream not oppress citizens of China?
You're full of it. If you want to scare people off using the GPL, make a technical point most will accept or at least argue over. GPL code is not a war machine, as much as a kitchen knife is. But both can be used for wrong purposes...
Meaning of market revenue?
by
rg3
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I'm curious to know, since I have no idea about the topic, what does market revenue (which is what grew 27.1% according to TFA) exactly mean and how does it relate to the number of people or computers using or running Linux.
Which pills are they using?
by
Mr2001
·
· Score: 3, Funny
I don't read Chinese, so I can only respond to the email advertisements I get in English, but I've tried them all and *I* sure haven't grown 27.1%... maybe I should hire a translator.
How does an operating system generate millions of dollars? Do they mean save?
Save would be in the billions. Say you have 200 million children and you wanted to give them computers. 200,000,000 times $1,000 for office, windows, email (servers and client), powerpoint, database, compilers and tools, etc. is not going to cut it.
One thing most of us don't understand is that they will not pay M$ prices, they can't. Linux probably runs $1 or less a copy. Saving, 199.9 billion. Comes with source and having a million programmers improve it is real and economical. It might take a generation but once established there will be no room for expensive western products.
Microsoft has a dilema, if they want a piece of the worlds biggest single market they have to license their entire suite for less than $20 to stand a chance. Explaining this to the western pricing models will send the market into kaos. And it still does not address the open sources issue.
It may not be just Microsoft that has issues, imagine what would happen if China produced a x86 chip that was 90% as fast as AMD or Intel but cost $10 or less.
Like most things, it is only a mater of time and North America will import database appliances and ERP systems from China for a fraction of current costs. It might take 10 years to be viewed as a issue but it is already happening. Linux in in almost every $49 wireless home AP out there.
In the end, every business that makes it will be services orientated. The OS is a commodity.
Re:Generate?
by
110010001000
·
· Score: 0, Informative
I don't understand. $1,000 is not what Windows/Office/Email/Database costs in Windows. Windows and Office usually comes with the computer. Cost to the end user: $0. There are plenty of "free" alternatives for email/database/etc on Windows as well. In case you don't know, much OSS runs on Windows. OSS doesn't just run on Linux. Microsoft has already introduced lower cost versions of Windows/Office to compete in price sensistive markets.
Oh and BTW: the wireless AP makers (like Linksys) have already dumped Linux for a proprietary OS (VxWorks).
So basically you are wrong on every point, yet you will be modded up +5 and I will be modded down. Such is Slashdot!
Re:Generate?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I don't think you understand the concept of bulk licensing. As a result, you obviously are not in a position to discuss issues resulting in pricing from increased licenses versus huge price cuts per license. Nor do you understand the Chinese. Let's just say getting 200 million poor Chinese children computers is not on their to-do lists.
Everyone knows that the Chinese are some of the biggest pirates out there, and it's basically, for the time being, a lawless and lost market for competing software providers.
I would not put it past even the Chinese government to simply be pirating copies of Windows, and not because it costs them so much money, rather because they can.
Just like everything else they do, it's all stolen.
Last, but not least, we will not be importing any major software tools from the Chinese (or India) any time soon as the majority (read: not all) of their programmers are not very good, which is why they work for such little money. The best software they will be making is going to be repackaged OSS, or stolen proprietary code and even then, I bet any added features, if they choose to add any, will be second rate compared to any real software provider's.
By the way, what kids need 'compilers and tools' ?
Re:Generate?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
> imagine what would happen if China produced a x86 chip that was 90% as fast as AMD or Intel but cost $10 or less.
Note that a chinese factory has purchased a license to produce (was it 130nm or 90nm?) Transmeta Efficeons. I guess China can't afford to have fans or other active cooling devices in a computer case. Efficeon + Linus + Linux is a triumvirate to build on. Seeing that Fujitsu seems to have no intentions to take over the development of Efficeon (I think they are still producing though), I certainly hope that somebody will continue to develop the Efficeon line, even if it were chinese.
large amounts of computers in china are sold as white boxes. for the average person, the cost of installing a legal copy of windows xp and microsoft office etc. would be prohibitively high.
Massive increase.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The summary says: "Boosted by government purchases and SCO UNIX replacements, Linux grew by 27.1% in China in 2005 and generated $11.8 mln for the companies involved."
Neither does the article say *anything* about the replacements being SCO distributions of Linux. Unless you're consciously attempting to troll (not unlikely), I would say RTFA or atleast the F'ing summary before posting. THank you.
-- An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
These revenue reports just say "Some geezer made some money off of selling Linux this year". Who cares about that? I want to know how much the number of installed computers increased by.
It is obvious the money sum is not impressive even for slashdotters here, however the strategic gain is somewhere else: by using Linux, China already spared some billions of dollars need not be payed for Microsoft Windows. That's another small drop helping to keep up the huge trade deficit of the opponent empire with them.
the money sum is not impressive even for slashdotters here, however the strategic gain is somewhere else: by using Linux, China already spared some billions of dollars need not be payed for Microsoft Windows
There is no great gain if Linux running on commodity hardware is simply replacing Unix and big iron in the back office.
Windows generates a lot of employment and export dollars for China. Don't be surprised if the government's commitment to Linux is something less than total.
your gas stats are completely wrong
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Uhm, that crap about gas is all wrong. China has had cars and been using gas for at least as long as the US, if not longer. they've had vechicles, trucks, planes, you name it.
Have you ever been there? come on, get a clue!
there are more people, and more cars in one city than the US has in the whole country!
so, exactly why is the gas going to SUDDENLY skyrocket now? for no reason?
So what's next years excuse going to be? india ? or some other BS reason for the lack or oil or higher prices? i know, it'll be some war-related issues.... yawn...
oil prices are down, around $40/barrel but gas is at an all time high. demand isnt up, supply isnt down. the price is just skyrocketing. and why? because they can!!
consumers are a bunch of freaking sheep! take gas to $10 a gallon now. what will you do? whine and cry and complain, but generally accept it. that's what. yep.
Re:your gas stats are completely wrong
by
eggoeater
·
· Score: 1
I don't normally reply to AC but you made some good points I'd like to respond to...
I agree, gas prices are artificially high right now but crude prices will catch up.
Yes, China has a lot of cars. Yes, they use a lot of gas now.
Here's another point though: China (and India) is developing a middle class where previously there was none (2.5 billion?). This means a LOT more people needing....we'll they need the same crap I buy on a daily/weekly/yearly basis. Crude oil goes to manufacturing just as much as it goes to transportation.
As Asia's middle class explodes (and yes, explode is the correct word for the growth rate) they will demand more of everything, and just about everything requires oil to harvest, melt, heat, cool, transport, light, heal,... you get the point.
And guess what else middle-class people do? They have more kids.
Re:your gas stats are completely wrong
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
You do know that in China you are resstricted to ONE child per family, right?
There are population growth controls in place, you know. right?
oh, you didn't know.
The problem I see it is that most if not all the news reports always talk like China has had NO (as in ZERO) gas consumption before. like they're just getting cars now. Which is completely wrong.
I went to china two years ago, and even then there were more cars and vechicles than the US has ever had.
Yes China's economony is exploding, but the type of growth you're talking about takes years, if not decades. even children dont grow up and buy cars overnight!
So again, this daily gas price fluctuation makes no sense. How is it explained by these other markets? It's not!!
and why do the prices constantly go up day after day, week after week, month after month? for the last two years? has there REALLY been that much growth in those areas to account for this?
no... there hasn't. has there been one tenth of one percent growth to account for this? nope. it's pure price fixing.
and people get mired in this muck every day, it keeps peoples focus off the real issues. so for years they get away with this crap, and you people - you sheep, do nothing.
So here's my prediction: gas will go to $2/gallon, then $5 then maybe even $10, but at least $5/gallon, and the public will do NOTHING!
anyone wanna place bets? I'll win...
Re:piracy?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
Modify and distribute it and don't provide the source.
Patents and Linux in China
by
nikostheater
·
· Score: 1
Not only that helps Linux,but ensures that a possible patent fight from Microsoft it's likely to cause the ban of microsoft products from china..
-- Bill Gates said:"I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine"
My favorite number is 09 F9 11 02 9D 74
Re:I'm willing to bet you didn't think this throug
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
What makes you think the chinese build on sand?
The weaker a person's bonds to social institutions, the more unconventional and deviant their behavior- M. Zlokovich
you should take the time to read and think -- carefully -- about your own signature.
I live in China, in the far far west and in the markets here you can pick up a copy of WindowsXP for 10 RMB - about US$1.25. A copy of Oracle IIi will set you back the grand total of 15 RMB - almost 2 dollars. A copy of Redhat will cost you the same as a copy of Oracle because the pricing is based on the number of CD's.
Tried to find a copy of OSX when we were up in the prefectural capital and they asked 500RMB for it - US$62. We could have haggled but weren't really interested.
If Linux has gained the ground the article says they have then good on them. At the end user level it would be almost impossible to get any meaningful figures.
Re:Linux and Windows in China
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I live in China, in the far far west and in the markets here you can pick up a copy of WindowsXP for 10 RMB - about US$1.25. A copy of Oracle IIi will set you back the grand total of 15 RMB - almost 2 dollars. A copy of Redhat will cost you the same as a copy of Oracle because the pricing is based on the number of CD's.
Tried to find a copy of OSX when we were up in the prefectural capital and they asked 500RMB for it - US$62. We could have haggled but weren't really interested.
Darl McBride is right, and Linux is a Communist Plot!
-- General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
I'm still bet you didn't think this through!
by
gd23ka
·
· Score: 1
The theory is sound and I'm solid proof of it. Your point is?
But until I hear from you this up front: Why build a country on microsoft sand when you can build it on solid granite which you already own?
I know exactly the place for this discussion!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Why don't you take this dicussion to MSDN and discuss that with Dr. GUI?
Great firewall of China grows 27.1%
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Slashdot linux zealots conflicted.
It's gotten to, Buy Made in Mexico
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I bought a trimmer today. Two models, one made in Mexico, the other China. You know it's getting bad when Made in Mexico beats Made in China, even if it costs more.
Re:It's gotten to, Buy Made in Mexico
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
if it costs more, the MIM hasn't beaten MIC yet.
Re:piracy?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Informative
If a linux package is distributed commercially, then it can be considered piracy if you as an end user copy the whole thing and share it with your friends.
The reason is that Linux distributions aren't subject to the GPL: mere inclusion of GPL'ed software on the same medium as commercial software does not cause the commercial software to be subject to the GPL.
Therefore, a Linux distribution can include both GPL software (which you can distribute), and commercial software like an installer, or vendor-provided application software, or configuration tools, for instance, which they don't allow you to redistribute.
Without a license for any commercial and non-free software on the Linux CD, Only the specific software that is distributed under the GPL may be copied from commercial Linux CDs, without a separate license to duplicate the software not subject to the GPL.
Yes I do. That is pretty much exactly what I want. The sooner we get through these wars to end all wars the better off we'll be. They are pretty much inevitable and the more we put them off the worse they'll be. We already have evidence of this every time a market correction is delayed.
the truth about oil
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I'm guessing the oil situation has more in common with welfare than anything else. It has little to do with supply and demand, and a lot to do with a cartel controlling the price and mix of non-USA oil.
For example, only about 12% of the US energy demand is satisfied by persian gulf oil. A country that wastes as much enery as the USA could cut 12% of it's energy use almost trivially. In fact a lot of countries could...but that would cause oil prices to plunge, and the economies of the OPEC nations to collapse, and all those carefully crafted flows of money like :
USA->OPEC->NATION_BILLIONAIRES->USA INVESTMENT USA->CHINA->OPEC->NATION_BILLIONAIRES->USA INVESTMENT (and the myriad of others...)...to collapse on their face.
I'm not going to call it a conspiracy, because I hate that word, but I will say the game is definitely rigged. And whether you're in Europe, or Asia or the USA, or even a citizen in an oil-rich OPEC state, you're all getting buggered by the oil welfare state...it's welfare for billionaires, from what I can tell.
Remember the charts showing the flows of money for the marchall plan of WW2? One of those for the oil industry would probably look very interesting, especially if you took in to the detail of various political entities in Texas and Washington, DC.
So does this mean that China is the land of freedom but is getting close to no longer being so? What does this mean for:
Not even freedom of choiche, let alone freedom of speak.
Then you're back with how great China is with:
So stop that nonsense about corporations' pressure, the only type of pression in China is the one by the Government upon chinese people.
Yeah, I'd like it if the only pressure in the United States was government pressure. (though seriously it'd be stronger if it was the only pressure) Right now in the United States, you have to deal with corporate pressure, organized crime pressure, medical establishment pressure, scientific establishment pressure, organized religion pressure, and the average joe on the street pressure, just to name a few.
Mod parent up
by
claus.wilke
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The parent poster is 100% right. It's sad how few people understand this. With the way the majority of contemporary American cities are built, it's essentially impossible to introduce efficient mass transit, simply because there are very few places that have sufficient population density to be attractive stops for mass transit. City planning has to be changed first, then people can use more mass transit and use their car less.
For more info, read "Suburban Nation" by Duany et al.
Also, as a counter example, consider San Francisco, which still has a traditional city layout, and functioning mass transit.
Re:Mod parent up
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Rebuild all the cities to be mass transit friendly? That's not gonna happen.
Cars and busses/subways aren't the only options, I think americans are going to end up switching to motorcycles. Sure those have their own downsides, but America's already a dangerous place anyway, and if most vehicles or even a just umpteen % of them are motorcycles, car drivers will probably watch out for them more. And other things, like motorcycle only parking spots or even small motorcycle only roads will appear, it should be much more cheaper to build bridges that are only strong enough to support motorcycle weight.
Bicycles have already been suggested, and that's the same principle, just a completely fanatical version.
100% agree with you on rebuilding cities. Sim City is not the Real World (tm), it takes years and billions of $ to remodel by which time macro economic factors have changed and it's all a grandiose white elephant project. And large infrastructure problems consistently run over time and budget. So rebuilding cities is a great utopian view, but given the last 100 years of European history I'm a little skeptical of utopian options.
How realistic is your motorcycle option for all cities? Just within the US local weather conditions vary massively and also motorcycles are good for commutes, but pretty inflexible for other types of travel (vacations, weekly shopping, school run and more). Unfortunately, until we get teleporting or flying cars it's going to be more of the same congestion, pollution, spiralling real estate costs and urban sprawl:-(
also motorcycles are good for commutes, but pretty inflexible for other types of travel (vacations, weekly shopping, school run and more)
Also of note is the fact that many people who live in rural areas combine a work commute with a shopping trip. The nearest grocery store to my home is 20 miles away (in the nearest town). Heck the only business within 10 miles of my home is a small country gas station.
B/c of this I do all of my grocery shopping (and most other shopping) on the way home from work. A motorcyle wouldn't be effective in this situation.
-- "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
Re:Mod parent up
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Sidecar motorcycles ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidecar ) should work pretty well for shopping, and maybe even for school runs, some parents would consider it too unsafe, but some kids would probably think it would really impress their friends. Small trailers could also be attached to motorcycles to carry more stuff only when neccessary, that should work for some weekend trips(with a sidecar also).
For some vacations, motorboats could be used instead of cars, although that would require being somewhere near a body of water, with worse weather for motorcycles. Boats could be used for other things too if towns were built around lakes, but water caries sound very well, so that's probably a very bad idea(not to mention all the problems with heavy anarchic traffic).
The Myth of American Obsesity Re:in comparison to.
by
Joey7F
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
For two reasons. One because you're probably the most obese people on earth, which doesn't get any better by you sitting in cars and at desks all day. Getting to the public transportation is tiresome because you don't get the exercise of using public transportation. The 10 minute walk to/from public transportation actually makes a difference.
Kjella, I think we have spoken before, you are Norwegian right? I recently got back from a trip to Europe, so I would like to point out a few things. One, Americans are not that fat. I saw plenty of fat people while I was in Spain, Italy and yes, even Norway. The main difference is that there are more truly obese people in America than in other countries. The average guy in the US is just slightly more overweight than the average guy in Europe from my experience. (Actually, my experience was that the British I met on the continent, were fatter than the Americans I met there). In fact, several times I was the one suggesting walking here or there, when others wanted taxis.
The 10 minute walk to public transportation is why New Yorkers are more in shape. I agree with you there. The problem is that even in a big city, such as the one where I live (Tampa, FL), my work is at least 15-20km away. By car, it takes 15 minutes to get there. By public transport, I would have a 20 minute walk (I know many people, who couldn't even get out of their neighborhood in 20 minutes of walking), a 1 hour trip and then a half an hour walk back to my job site. So almost two hours, and when you arrived you are soaked in sweat...assuming that you don't have to change buses. Because it is predominantly poor people riding buses (not as true in really large cities) the bus stops are in bad neighborhoods and are usually dangerous. Not my idea of a good time. Nor would it be yours. Many Europeans asked me about this subject while I was there, and I think I figured it out. Europe is conducive to losing weight. I dropped 40 pounds (~20 kilos) in 9 weeks. Heck, walking in the US, is usually not the safest. The streets are loaded with cars, the sidewalks are next to the road and you are always a sneeze away from being killed. I think the lifestyle difference comes down to two things:
1.) You walk...everywhere. I was averaging 3-4km a day (more or less) 2.) Because of all that walking, you are buying your groceries on a daily basis, this means you are eating fresh vegetables, fresh breads, and generally more healthy food.
Secondly, you don't have much of public transportation because noone would use it. Why should you, your car gets you where you want at almost no cost at all, and I admit the convienience of going exactly when you want it to go, to exactly whereever you're going is an advantage.
It is a HUGE advantage! In Europe, it is a pain to find a place for your car. Not true in the states. We had measures that dedicated a lane on the highways for two or more passengers. It was still more convenient for people to bypass that opportunity and wait in longer lines, than find someone who works where you do, who is interested in being dependent on you to get to work. Unless you living next to the person, forget about it. A lot of cities have removed them because the added wait times on the commutes were pumping out more pollution.
In order to run it at any profitability, there must be people willing to use it regularly, not as a last ditch emergency when the car breaks down. If you expect public transportation to act as a taxi service on demand, it's not going to happen.
Like I said earlier, people aren't going to use it as long as driving a car is inexpensive. I prefer public transportation. If I lived in Alexandria and worked in DC, I would be taking the metro...it is fantastic! DC is made for that though. Large population, hard to expand the roads etc. Ditto with New York.
If you tell me it can't be done, bullshit. Our population de
Chinese Resources for Linux on Mobile Computers
by
wehe
·
· Score: 1
I live in China. Seriously. 11 Million is like peanuts around here, this country is exploding at a phenomenal rate and to be honest the adoption of 3 ply toilet paper is higher than 27% and it makes a lot more than 11 Million a year.
I don't beleive this can be right.
We were talking about this at coffee today. $11.8 million is probably the lunch budget for Dell execs. I guess in a way it's a good thing, but getting excited about it does seem a bit premature.
Re:The Myth of American Obsesity Re:in comparison
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
3 Km from a grocery? What kind of shithole do you live in that it is dangerous to take the bus? Thank $DEITY I live in a civilized country they. I can choose from 3 grociers less than 500 meters away from my house. I take the train every to get to work, it's a 30 minute ride + 15 minute walk. People ask me why I don't have a car and I reply I don't need one.
This comment captures it perfectly
by
moultano
·
· Score: 1
I currently live in Pittsburgh, PA and formerly lived in Cincinnati, OH. I've travelled a bit around the country and generally found that the degree of necessity of cars is directly proportional to how recently the area was built.
Yeah, because of your governments' outrageously high taxes on gasoline. You pay more in taxes than the fuel itself costs.
...but you don't even have proper public transportation where you could.
More bullshit. Every city in the US has public transportation.
...last time I was there we bought some stuff in a grocery, and the plastic bags were completely unsuited for carrying. They were barely usable enough to get them out to your car in the parking lot.
Congratulations, you just achieved Ultra Bullshit level. When given a choice, most people choose the plastic bags precisely because they are easier to carry from the store to the home door. And what were you doing with a car, anyway?
So if you're stuck in a corner, I'd say that's because you're painting yourself in there.
No, we drove ourselves out of the corner that you put yourself into, because we didn't like the condescending, full of shit whiners who sit in that corner. Those whiners resent the US because we didn't accept the restrictions on our mobility in the past and as the challenges of the future mount, we'll face them too. So don't put your shit on us, we're getting tired of hearing it.
Other countries cope, if you can't you need to blame something else than geography.
We're coping just fine, thanks. You just keep sitting in that corner waiting for the bus and telling yourself, "we are better, we are better, we are better," instead of "if I were in America, I'd have been there 3 and a half hours ago."
Sorry, but we're not the ones who missed the bus.
-- 3 things about computers: they're alive, they're self-aware, and they hate your guts.
Re:Bullshit
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Posts like this tend to make me think that Osama has a point.
Posts like this tend to make me think that Osama has a point.
No doubt, because he's a coward, too, only not anonymous. Now go back to the corner and crawl back under your rock.
-- 3 things about computers: they're alive, they're self-aware, and they hate your guts.
Wow, linux grew 27.1%...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
For some reason, that statistic makes about as much sense as a rotweiler wearing a tu-tu.
Remember kids, 90% of all statistics are pulled out of someone's ass.
From an inclusive perspective:
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
let me rephrase this for you: "This is also why we in the US will be paying $5/gallon for gas soon... not because of our demand but because of Asia's demand."
It could be written: "This is why also we in the US will be paying $5+/gallon for gas soon... not because of our demand but because of an increased total worldwide economy. From this economy follows the demand for energy, but also the ability for more people to pay for it. More people (with means to pay) bidding for a limited resource = higher prices."
Not that I really care, but it sounded so myopic. What Americans have bought for all these dollars flowing around the world lessening the economic advantage of the petrodollar is another discussion.
Definitely
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Microsoft just signed $700 million in Chinese contracts in one day last week. Linux's ~$20 million is ~3% of that.
Re:The Myth of American Obsesity Re:in comparison
by
Joey7F
·
· Score: 1
Tampa is not a shithole, but the buses don't service the suburbs in any convenient way. I have never done it, so I am not sure where they go in my area. Let me put it this way. I see buses in my home area maybe...maybe once every 3 weeks or so. In the ghetto, they run, but only because the poor people have no other choice.
W/r/t the groceries, I have three stores at the 3km distance. My three are all at the 3km mark (one might be 2 and change). It takes a while just to leave the neighborhood (5 minutes of solid 5km/hr walking). That is one of the costs of living in a house over an apartment.
Since Linux is growing in China, will we be seeing headlines on Slashdot about how Linux violates human rights in China? For some reason, I think we won't.
-- "Sufferin' succotash."
The adoption rate is slow
by
sql_noob
·
· Score: 1
I found that lots of Chinese doesn't know English. When they get a linux CD. It is likely that they found two issues:
1- Cannot display Chinese or ugly fonts --- In some distros, asian fonts is optional --- In most distros, the display of unicode/asian homepage is weird. You can see a combination of varios fonts. For example, a few character using Japanese fonts, most characters use a simplified Chinese fonts and the rest are traditional Chinese. (Imaginate a document with Arial+Bittream+Courier displaying in random order)
2- Cannot type --- People usually have to download/apt some modules to enable Chinese input. They may need to edit some configuration files as well. That kick the newbies out.
Most people I know thinking that pirating, fighting virus/spyware and reinstallation once in a while is perfectly normal.
In most distros, the display of unicode/asian homepage is weird. You can see a combination of varios fonts. For example, a few character using Japanese fonts, most characters use a simplified Chinese fonts and the rest are traditional Chinese.
This is really an issue about UTF-8 without proper language specifications. It has become more and more serious a problem now. It is even not only in the Linux world, but a universal problem! I wrote a specific page about it, and maybe you will find it useful:
Re:Hmmm interesting.. i've said for YEARS...
by
davidsyes
·
· Score: 1
"If you value your National, Corporate, or Personal Security, you WILL get of off ms windoze (the USA's backdoor into your nation, corporation, or home) and use something the USA cannot demand the overseas backdoor encryption access to (ostensibly in the name of hunting criminals...)"
Now, for China, Australia, Japan, Korea... ANY place where there IS or CAN be potential for the US to "wage battlespace war" on these people, they MUST, as a right to national sovereignty and dignity and national, corporate and personal responsibility and duty ditch ms' warez.
But, with me, the patriotism or nationality card won't fly here. I specifically use Linux as my daily box because I despise ms tactics at trying to hem me in. I couldn't wrap my brain around Mac, tho it was nice in a lot of ways to use, and I missed being able to customize the hell out of my old win 3.x desktop with Killer Windows Utilities before the tyrannical, hegemony-minded, lockdown assholes in Redmond came along and screwed all that up for a few years...
But, when there WAS NO Linux around, and win 3x was there, it WAS nice to have a GUI. But, then it was the only game in town. Being the person I am, sort of an underdog, I DESPISE any country, company, or government trying to tell the WHOLE WORLD what to use, do or not use or not do. Being the Linux and Open Source combo seems to be an "equalizer" of sorts, I firmly support THAT ANY day of the week over something that can be controlled by ONE country when that something is used all over the world.
Now, it is GOOD to have the world have choices. If it kills ms, so be it. Fair's fair, and they SURE as hell didn't get so big by being fair or honest or OPEN. Greed and selfishness executed with a vicious or insidious edge and extortion or blackmail of hardware makers is plenty of reason to see a person, company or even country's aims fall apart.
And, as far as IIII am concerned, ANY human forays beyond the moon MUST be an EARTH venture, not a NATIONAL venture. To me, Earth is MORE than about just one country or government. I for one hope there is NEVER manifest destiny, "expansionism" or any of the destructive shit of the human past getting out there. If it does, then humans deserve for a superior species to smack our asses (specifically the governments and policy makers') asses back to the big blue marble and set up a barrier to keep our asses contained until we MATURE.
(Pops Valium, lithium, and sundry of other pills and potions...)
-- Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..."
Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Ruthless corporate exploitation of "cheap labor" could also seem to make "current US-style capitalism" seem like "communism in capitalist clothes".
What I mean is this: in the old day, much of US production was IN the US. Little made for use HERE was manufactured outside, until we got Mego and Hasbro products cheaply made in Taiwan, or Hong Kong, or a FEW other places. Even b4 the 70's, it seems LITTLE was made outside the US to be shipped back here.
Now, with "globalization" (nothing new, it's just more pervasive and practiced by MORE than JUST the USA..) of the kind we've seen in the past 8 or 15 years, the US (and other) corporations shareholders and market managers DEMAND that profits go up, costs go down, and markets be expanded. With everyone doing this, serious collisions will happen. Now, if the US leadership is corrupted by power and money, then it's quite obvious that for military and procurement reasons, they and the associated industry forces will constantly HARP on China being a grave threat to US interests outside the USA, yet, for MONEY (sell granny for a fucking buck or two) purposes, China is our MFN trading partner. When hiccups are needed for entropy stimulation, we make or incite enemies to stimulate more military and other growth. But, so long as there are no actual wars between the big countries and ideologies to ruin the markets, then it's OK for the US government to remain corrupt (well, EVERY government is corrupt in some way or another) and just let US businesses set up shop and profit in "Communist Regimes".
To me, political names, slandering, and ideological sparring is just disgusting and stupid. At the end of the day, it's NOT the average citizen or taxpayer who is angling to kick some ass. It's the game-makers, the brinkmanship hard-up politicos who want THEIR ideas foisted upon others at almost ANY cost...
So, in the end, if we can all agree on something, maybe to be nasty or maybe to pull open some eyelids, there are ways life in in the US can be equated to the best and worst aspects of almost any form of government.
Too bad there aren't any powerful ETs to come along and ask the PEOPLE what it is the hell they want. If we got our wishes, every major government on Earth would be rebuilt... until some petty assholes angling for money and power sneak back into the system and screw it all up again...
(Pops pills and downs 3-in-1 coffee packs to calm down...)
-- Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..."
Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
It's the perceived quality:mexico slaughters china
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The point is that Made in Mexico slaughters Made in China. That he was willing to pay more for MADE IN MEXICO (and perhaps no other reason) is the point. It's well known that Made in China really means, Made like crap and made to break so buy two! God help them in the quest for Space. Imagine sitting on the rockets then looking up at a "Made in China" sticker on your capsule. LET ME OUT OF HERE!!!
growth rate and not market share
by
john_uy
·
· Score: 1
this is just the growth rate of linux and not the market share. i would like to see a full analysis of market share compared to other systems.
frankly speaking, 27.1% growth is pretty small for me. in absolute terms, it may be even measly in terms of numbers compared to the adoption of other countries. given the $11.8 million, i believe it should be way bigger than that given china's size.
-- Live your life each day as if it was your last.
You can't pirate GPLed software, but you can pirate the proprietary stuff that a lot of distros package alongisde all the FOSS stuff, eg installers, config tools, etc.
The adoption rate should be higher, but it's not taking into account the people in China who pirate Linux.
Sure, there's plenty of piracy in China, but how can you "pirate" GPL'd software?
--jrd
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
But I thought that SCO has a new line of software. If China went exclusivly SCO they would have the potential to rule (sue) the world.
Stay tuned for new sig...
Wow, that sure is.... underwhelming. China is supposed to be a rather large market.
I'd like to see the growth stats for pretty much everything else in China....
I'm willing to bet that MS products grew a lot more than 27%.
My brother has to go there for business on a regular business. He says they're building the equivalent of New York City every year.
This is also why we in the US will be paying $5/gallon for gas soon... not because of our demand but because of Asia's demand.
$7.95/mo, 200 GB disk, 2TBxfer, MySQL, PHP, RoR.
In a country where megacorporations cannot lobby or pressure the government to make certain choices, the natural result is that the government chooses the cheapest product. In the case of Linux, this also turns to be a much safer product than the one most used (Windows). I'm afraid this will give chinese hackers and spammers an advantage over the US.
I wonder now if choosing the right OS is becoming a matter of national security. In any case, I really hope this news gives a nudge to the US, saying "see? The chinese use it, why shouldn't we?"
So...they're using Linux, but it's from SCO. Is this good or bad?
The AC is being funny. If this was the Music Industry, their statement would be something to the extent that the music sales were up, but it would be up twice as high if it weren't for the pirates. You can't pirate GPL software, but you can make a joke on why the numbers aren't higher.
As my Karma Burns: "Burn, Baby Burn, Flames are Getting Higher" - Shawdow Warrior
Proof by very large bribes. QED.
Imressive growth numbers, but a 51.1 million dollar market is puny. ( Especially, if you consider that there's 1.2 Billion people in China. ) Hopefully, it'll grow large enough to warrant the large investment needed to market over there.
You see, for a small company such as mine, I don't have the resources to park there until the market is large enough to support my operations - unlike IBM, MS, SAP, etc... That's were globalization fails. Small companies can't compete with the large multinationals. That's kind of the whole falacy with the globalization raising everyone'sstandard of living.
There's only so much inputs (oil, raw materials, etc...) to go around. Think I'm wrong? Well, I guess the markets are wrong too. Oil, steel, and other raw materials and fuel prices have been skyrocketing (Because the whole world wants to live like the US). But my market is just here in the S.E. US and I don't have the resources to expand into China. So, my costs go up, but my revenues stay the same. My demand curve is quite, how do the ecomonists say it?, elastic. I can't raise prices. But the multinationals, can go and move into China or whereeever and take advantage of the lower labor costs. The result, small entrepreneurial companies can't survive and the multinationals will take over everything. That's just the way it is.
I'm all ears for anyone who says the a small company can survive in this environment - please post solution.
Also, if we in the US are using 25% of the resources (inputs) and we're only 5% of the world's population, how can 100% of the world live like US? They can't. everyone's standard of living will have to be reduced (I'm trying - I'm using much less fuel and food!) or there's going to be very rich and the other 5 billion people will live in poverty -like now.
[obligatory joke about how Free Software == communism]
This article do not have much information. Is the server software or the desktop software that is gaining hold there? Linux has always grown in server market. IMHO, Growth in Desktop market will be a great deal as that helps the growth of the Linux much faster than server growth.
"I'm willing to bet that MS products grew a lot more than 27%. [My brother] says they're building the equivalent of New York City every year." What makes you think the chinese build on sand?
"I'm afraid this will give chinese hackers and spammers an advantage over the US."
And how much GPL software will be used to oppress citizens of China?
I'm curious to know, since I have no idea about the topic, what does market revenue (which is what grew 27.1% according to TFA) exactly mean and how does it relate to the number of people or computers using or running Linux.
I don't read Chinese, so I can only respond to the email advertisements I get in English, but I've tried them all and *I* sure haven't grown 27.1%... maybe I should hire a translator.
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
So there are now 121 Linux systems in China?! Go LINUX!
How does an operating system generate millions of dollars? Do they mean save?
It grew from 0.1% to 0.1271%
C-linux "our home made product built for us to own you!"
Neither does the article say *anything* about the replacements being SCO distributions of Linux. Unless you're consciously attempting to troll (not unlikely), I would say RTFA or atleast the F'ing summary before posting. THank you.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
These revenue reports just say "Some geezer made some money off of selling Linux this year". Who cares about that? I want to know how much the number of installed computers increased by.
It is obvious the money sum is not impressive even for slashdotters here, however the strategic gain is somewhere else: by using Linux, China already spared some billions of dollars need not be payed for Microsoft Windows. That's another small drop helping to keep up the huge trade deficit of the opponent empire with them.
There you are, staring at me again.
After long, exhausting and expensive research, China has found out how to buy a free product.
is the distro they run in China.
Uhm, that crap about gas is all wrong.
China has had cars and been using gas for at least as long as the US, if not longer.
they've had vechicles, trucks, planes, you name it.
Have you ever been there? come on, get a clue!
there are more people, and more cars in one city than the US has in the whole country!
so, exactly why is the gas going to SUDDENLY skyrocket now? for no reason?
So what's next years excuse going to be? india ? or some other BS reason for the lack or oil or higher prices?
i know, it'll be some war-related issues.... yawn...
oil prices are down, around $40/barrel but gas is at an all time high. demand isnt up, supply isnt down. the price is just skyrocketing.
and why? because they can!!
consumers are a bunch of freaking sheep! take gas to $10 a gallon now. what will you do? whine and cry and complain, but generally accept it. that's what. yep.
Modify and distribute it and don't provide the source.
Not only that helps Linux,but ensures that a possible patent fight from Microsoft it's likely to cause the ban of microsoft products from china..
Bill Gates said:"I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine" My favorite number is 09 F9 11 02 9D 74
The weaker a person's bonds to social institutions, the more unconventional and deviant their behavior- M. Zlokovich
you should take the time to read and think -- carefully -- about your own signature.
I live in China, in the far far west and in the markets here you can pick up a copy of WindowsXP for 10 RMB - about US$1.25. A copy of Oracle IIi will set you back the grand total of 15 RMB - almost 2 dollars. A copy of Redhat will cost you the same as a copy of Oracle because the pricing is based on the number of CD's.
Tried to find a copy of OSX when we were up in the prefectural capital and they asked 500RMB for it - US$62. We could have haggled but weren't really interested.
If Linux has gained the ground the article says they have then good on them. At the end user level it would be almost impossible to get any meaningful figures.
We hate the Chinese, don't we? Or do we get to make an exception when it has to do with Linux, sort of like exceptions with Microsoft?
i'm not thinking entirely straight this morning.
Linux grew on my computer 100% two years ago, but than it stagnated.
"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
are you saying the word 'free' has two meanings?
my password really is 'stinkypants'
And I for one Welcome our new Chinese Overlords. Go communism! Yeah, Red Team! Go, Go, Go!
Darl McBride is right, and Linux is a Communist Plot!
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
The theory is sound and I'm solid proof of it. Your point is?
But until I hear from you this up front: Why build a country on microsoft sand when you can build it on solid granite which you already own?
Why don't you take this dicussion to MSDN and discuss that with Dr. GUI?
Slashdot linux zealots conflicted.
I bought a trimmer today. Two models, one made in Mexico, the other China. You know it's getting bad when Made in Mexico beats Made in China, even if it costs more.
If a linux package is distributed commercially, then it can be considered piracy if you as an end user copy the whole thing and share it with your friends.
The reason is that Linux distributions aren't subject to the GPL: mere inclusion of GPL'ed software on the same medium as commercial software does not cause the commercial software to be subject to the GPL.
Therefore, a Linux distribution can include both GPL software (which you can distribute), and commercial software like an installer, or vendor-provided application software, or configuration tools, for instance, which they don't allow you to redistribute.
Without a license for any commercial and non-free software on the Linux CD, Only the specific software that is distributed under the GPL may be copied from commercial Linux CDs, without a separate license to duplicate the software not subject to the GPL.
Yes I do. That is pretty much exactly what I want. The sooner we get through these wars to end all wars the better off we'll be. They are pretty much inevitable and the more we put them off the worse they'll be. We already have evidence of this every time a market correction is delayed.
I'm guessing the oil situation has more in common with welfare than anything else. It has little to do with supply and demand, and a lot to do with a cartel controlling the price and mix of non-USA oil.
...to collapse on their face.
For example, only about 12% of the US energy demand is satisfied by persian gulf oil. A country that wastes as much enery as the USA could cut 12% of it's energy use almost trivially. In fact a lot of countries could...but that would cause oil prices to plunge, and the economies of the OPEC nations to collapse, and all those carefully crafted flows of money like :
USA->OPEC->NATION_BILLIONAIRES->USA INVESTMENT
USA->CHINA->OPEC->NATION_BILLIONAIRES->USA INVESTMENT
(and the myriad of others...)
I'm not going to call it a conspiracy, because I hate that word, but I will say the game is definitely rigged. And whether you're in Europe, or Asia or the USA, or even a citizen in an oil-rich OPEC state, you're all getting buggered by the oil welfare state...it's welfare for billionaires, from what I can tell.
Remember the charts showing the flows of money for the marchall plan of WW2? One of those for the oil industry would probably look very interesting, especially if you took in to the detail of various political entities in Texas and Washington, DC.
Learn more about the oil welfare state :
Arab_Oil_Embargo
OPEC at WP
OPEC at US DOE
Persian Gulf Oil Use by Country
China is nearly not the land of freedom.
So does this mean that China is the land of freedom but is getting close to no longer being so? What does this mean for:
Not even freedom of choiche, let alone freedom of speak.
Then you're back with how great China is with:
So stop that nonsense about corporations' pressure, the only type of pression in China is the one by the Government upon chinese people.
Yeah, I'd like it if the only pressure in the United States was government pressure. (though seriously it'd be stronger if it was the only pressure) Right now in the United States, you have to deal with corporate pressure, organized crime pressure, medical establishment pressure, scientific establishment pressure, organized religion pressure, and the average joe on the street pressure, just to name a few.
The parent poster is 100% right. It's sad how few people understand this. With the way the majority of contemporary American cities are built, it's essentially impossible to introduce efficient mass transit, simply because there are very few places that have sufficient population density to be attractive stops for mass transit. City planning has to be changed first, then people can use more mass transit and use their car less.
For more info, read "Suburban Nation" by Duany et al.
Also, as a counter example, consider San Francisco, which still has a traditional city layout, and functioning mass transit.
Kjella, I think we have spoken before, you are Norwegian right? I recently got back from a trip to Europe, so I would like to point out a few things. One, Americans are not that fat. I saw plenty of fat people while I was in Spain, Italy and yes, even Norway. The main difference is that there are more truly obese people in America than in other countries. The average guy in the US is just slightly more overweight than the average guy in Europe from my experience. (Actually, my experience was that the British I met on the continent, were fatter than the Americans I met there). In fact, several times I was the one suggesting walking here or there, when others wanted taxis.
The 10 minute walk to public transportation is why New Yorkers are more in shape. I agree with you there. The problem is that even in a big city, such as the one where I live (Tampa, FL), my work is at least 15-20km away. By car, it takes 15 minutes to get there. By public transport, I would have a 20 minute walk (I know many people, who couldn't even get out of their neighborhood in 20 minutes of walking), a 1 hour trip and then a half an hour walk back to my job site. So almost two hours, and when you arrived you are soaked in sweat...assuming that you don't have to change buses. Because it is predominantly poor people riding buses (not as true in really large cities) the bus stops are in bad neighborhoods and are usually dangerous. Not my idea of a good time. Nor would it be yours. Many Europeans asked me about this subject while I was there, and I think I figured it out. Europe is conducive to losing weight. I dropped 40 pounds (~20 kilos) in 9 weeks. Heck, walking in the US, is usually not the safest. The streets are loaded with cars, the sidewalks are next to the road and you are always a sneeze away from being killed. I think the lifestyle difference comes down to two things:
1.) You walk...everywhere. I was averaging 3-4km a day (more or less)
2.) Because of all that walking, you are buying your groceries on a daily basis, this means you are eating fresh vegetables, fresh breads, and generally more healthy food.
It is a HUGE advantage! In Europe, it is a pain to find a place for your car. Not true in the states. We had measures that dedicated a lane on the highways for two or more passengers. It was still more convenient for people to bypass that opportunity and wait in longer lines, than find someone who works where you do, who is interested in being dependent on you to get to work. Unless you living next to the person, forget about it. A lot of cities have removed them because the added wait times on the commutes were pumping out more pollution.
Like I said earlier, people aren't going to use it as long as driving a car is inexpensive. I prefer public transportation. If I lived in Alexandria and worked in DC, I would be taking the metro...it is fantastic! DC is made for that though. Large population, hard to expand the roads etc. Ditto with New York.
I am trying to collect some Chinese resources about Linux with laptops, PDAs and mobile phones. But I didn't get much submissions yet.
I live in China. Seriously. 11 Million is like peanuts around here, this country is exploding at a phenomenal rate and to be honest the adoption of 3 ply toilet paper is higher than 27% and it makes a lot more than 11 Million a year. I don't beleive this can be right.
3 Km from a grocery? What kind of shithole do you live in that it is dangerous to take the bus? Thank $DEITY I live in a civilized country they. I can choose from 3 grociers less than 500 meters away from my house. I take the train every to get to work, it's a 30 minute ride + 15 minute walk. People ask me why I don't have a car and I reply I don't need one.
I currently live in Pittsburgh, PA and formerly lived in Cincinnati, OH. I've travelled a bit around the country and generally found that the degree of necessity of cars is directly proportional to how recently the area was built.
...we pay about $6/gallon already.
...but you don't even have proper public transportation where you could.
...last time I was there we bought some stuff in a grocery, and the plastic bags were completely unsuited for carrying. They were barely usable enough to get them out to your car in the parking lot.
Yeah, because of your governments' outrageously high taxes on gasoline. You pay more in taxes than the fuel itself costs.
More bullshit. Every city in the US has public transportation.
Congratulations, you just achieved Ultra Bullshit level. When given a choice, most people choose the plastic bags precisely because they are easier to carry from the store to the home door. And what were you doing with a car, anyway?
So if you're stuck in a corner, I'd say that's because you're painting yourself in there.
No, we drove ourselves out of the corner that you put yourself into, because we didn't like the condescending, full of shit whiners who sit in that corner. Those whiners resent the US because we didn't accept the restrictions on our mobility in the past and as the challenges of the future mount, we'll face them too. So don't put your shit on us, we're getting tired of hearing it.
Other countries cope, if you can't you need to blame something else than geography.
We're coping just fine, thanks. You just keep sitting in that corner waiting for the bus and telling yourself, "we are better, we are better, we are better," instead of "if I were in America, I'd have been there 3 and a half hours ago."
Sorry, but we're not the ones who missed the bus.
3 things about computers: they're alive, they're self-aware, and they hate your guts.
For some reason, that statistic makes about as much sense as a rotweiler wearing a tu-tu.
Remember kids, 90% of all statistics are pulled out of someone's ass.
let me rephrase this for you:
"This is also why we in the US will be paying $5/gallon for gas soon... not because of our demand but because of Asia's demand."
It could be written:
"This is why also we in the US will be paying $5+/gallon for gas soon... not because of our demand but because of an increased total worldwide economy. From this economy follows the demand for energy, but also the ability for more people to pay for it. More people (with means to pay) bidding for a limited resource = higher prices."
Not that I really care, but it sounded so myopic. What Americans have bought for all these dollars flowing around the world lessening the economic advantage of the petrodollar is another discussion.
Microsoft just signed $700 million in Chinese contracts in one day last week. Linux's ~$20 million is ~3% of that.
Tampa is not a shithole, but the buses don't service the suburbs in any convenient way. I have never done it, so I am not sure where they go in my area. Let me put it this way. I see buses in my home area maybe...maybe once every 3 weeks or so. In the ghetto, they run, but only because the poor people have no other choice.
W/r/t the groceries, I have three stores at the 3km distance. My three are all at the 3km mark (one might be 2 and change). It takes a while just to leave the neighborhood (5 minutes of solid 5km/hr walking). That is one of the costs of living in a house over an apartment.
--Joey
Since Linux is growing in China, will we be seeing headlines on Slashdot about how Linux violates human rights in China? For some reason, I think we won't.
"Sufferin' succotash."
I found that lots of Chinese doesn't know English. When they get a linux CD. It is likely that they found two issues:
1- Cannot display Chinese or ugly fonts
--- In some distros, asian fonts is optional
--- In most distros, the display of unicode/asian homepage is weird. You can see a combination of varios fonts. For example, a few character using Japanese fonts, most characters use a simplified Chinese fonts and the rest are traditional Chinese.
(Imaginate a document with Arial+Bittream+Courier displaying in random order)
2- Cannot type
--- People usually have to download/apt some modules to enable Chinese input. They may need to edit some configuration files as well. That kick the newbies out.
Most people I know thinking that pirating, fighting virus/spyware and reinstallation once in a while is perfectly normal.
"If you value your National, Corporate, or Personal Security, you WILL get of off ms windoze (the USA's backdoor into your nation, corporation, or home) and use something the USA cannot demand the overseas backdoor encryption access to (ostensibly in the name of hunting criminals...)"
Now, for China, Australia, Japan, Korea... ANY place where there IS or CAN be potential for the US to "wage battlespace war" on these people, they MUST, as a right to national sovereignty and dignity and national, corporate and personal responsibility and duty ditch ms' warez.
But, with me, the patriotism or nationality card won't fly here. I specifically use Linux as my daily box because I despise ms tactics at trying to hem me in. I couldn't wrap my brain around Mac, tho it was nice in a lot of ways to use, and I missed being able to customize the hell out of my old win 3.x desktop with Killer Windows Utilities before the tyrannical, hegemony-minded, lockdown assholes in Redmond came along and screwed all that up for a few years...
But, when there WAS NO Linux around, and win 3x was there, it WAS nice to have a GUI. But, then it was the only game in town. Being the person I am, sort of an underdog, I DESPISE any country, company, or government trying to tell the WHOLE WORLD what to use, do or not use or not do. Being the Linux and Open Source combo seems to be an "equalizer" of sorts, I firmly support THAT ANY day of the week over something that can be controlled by ONE country when that something is used all over the world.
Now, it is GOOD to have the world have choices. If it kills ms, so be it. Fair's fair, and they SURE as hell didn't get so big by being fair or honest or OPEN. Greed and selfishness executed with a vicious or insidious edge and extortion or blackmail of hardware makers is plenty of reason to see a person, company or even country's aims fall apart.
And, as far as IIII am concerned, ANY human forays beyond the moon MUST be an EARTH venture, not a NATIONAL venture. To me, Earth is MORE than about just one country or government. I for one hope there is NEVER manifest destiny, "expansionism" or any of the destructive shit of the human past getting out there. If it does, then humans deserve for a superior species to smack our asses (specifically the governments and policy makers') asses back to the big blue marble and set up a barrier to keep our asses contained until we MATURE.
(Pops Valium, lithium, and sundry of other pills and potions...)
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Ruthless corporate exploitation of "cheap labor" could also seem to make "current US-style capitalism" seem like "communism in capitalist clothes".
What I mean is this: in the old day, much of US production was IN the US. Little made for use HERE was manufactured outside, until we got Mego and Hasbro products cheaply made in Taiwan, or Hong Kong, or a FEW other places. Even b4 the 70's, it seems LITTLE was made outside the US to be shipped back here.
Now, with "globalization" (nothing new, it's just more pervasive and practiced by MORE than JUST the USA..) of the kind we've seen in the past 8 or 15 years, the US (and other) corporations shareholders and market managers DEMAND that profits go up, costs go down, and markets be expanded. With everyone doing this, serious collisions will happen. Now, if the US leadership is corrupted by power and money, then it's quite obvious that for military and procurement reasons, they and the associated industry forces will constantly HARP on China being a grave threat to US interests outside the USA, yet, for MONEY (sell granny for a fucking buck or two) purposes, China is our MFN trading partner. When hiccups are needed for entropy stimulation, we make or incite enemies to stimulate more military and other growth. But, so long as there are no actual wars between the big countries and ideologies to ruin the markets, then it's OK for the US government to remain corrupt (well, EVERY government is corrupt in some way or another) and just let US businesses set up shop and profit in "Communist Regimes".
To me, political names, slandering, and ideological sparring is just disgusting and stupid. At the end of the day, it's NOT the average citizen or taxpayer who is angling to kick some ass. It's the game-makers, the brinkmanship hard-up politicos who want THEIR ideas foisted upon others at almost ANY cost...
So, in the end, if we can all agree on something, maybe to be nasty or maybe to pull open some eyelids, there are ways life in in the US can be equated to the best and worst aspects of almost any form of government.
Too bad there aren't any powerful ETs to come along and ask the PEOPLE what it is the hell they want. If we got our wishes, every major government on Earth would be rebuilt... until some petty assholes angling for money and power sneak back into the system and screw it all up again...
(Pops pills and downs 3-in-1 coffee packs to calm down...)
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
The point is that Made in Mexico slaughters Made in China. That he was willing to pay more for MADE IN MEXICO (and perhaps no other reason) is the point. It's well known that Made in China really means, Made like crap and made to break so buy two! God help them in the quest for Space. Imagine sitting on the rockets then looking up at a "Made in China" sticker on your capsule. LET ME OUT OF HERE!!!
this is just the growth rate of linux and not the market share. i would like to see a full analysis of market share compared to other systems.
frankly speaking, 27.1% growth is pretty small for me. in absolute terms, it may be even measly in terms of numbers compared to the adoption of other countries. given the $11.8 million, i believe it should be way bigger than that given china's size.
Live your life each day as if it was your last.
You can't pirate GPLed software, but you can pirate the proprietary stuff that a lot of distros package alongisde all the FOSS stuff, eg installers, config tools, etc.
It's official. Most of you are morons.