They're probably organized in some way or another already and it's not like they compete on the software they use. Just make sure to keep the requirements low and realistic and that the result is Free or that you own the code.
I suspect it was Vista that marked the beginning of the fall.
I suspect it's more the failure to come with a timely and interesting successor to XP. Vista was 'too little, too late'. It also caused IE to drop market share and happened way before netbooks, tablets or smart phones became a factor.
I'd say IR4 is internet. Robotics is industrial revolution + IT imho.
The next hybrid is computers + internet + physical adaptation. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have already lead to breakthroughs in the medical field and I think we'll see more remarkable developments in neurosurgery.
There are many examples of the legal system being used to preserve outdated and irrelevant business models that quite clearly fly in the face of expressed consumer demand (RIAA anyone?). This looks like it won't be any exception, unfortunately.
Wait, what? Online advertizing is outdated and irrelevant already? This whole online thing goes way too fast, I can't keep up.
"the yoke of MS oppression"
I present People's Exhibit A showing why everyone thinks open-source zealots are completely nanners.
This here is a case of an organization which wants to use open-source but finds it can't. There are a number of reasons for this, their own ineptitude and internal opposition for starters, failures in interoperability with other organizations too, but still they found they can't get rid of MS Office. It's perhaps far fledged to actually blame MS for this, it shows that it's also far fledged to accuse open-source adepts of zealotry or calling them crazy.
The only time I've ever felt oppressed by things MS does is when they do their idiotic "version-specific upgrade" thing, and when they do that, I can always just wait for the next iteration of Windows that doesn't suck. Office in particular is probably MS's best product, and definitely the best of its kind. Anytime I've ever tried to use something that is not Word or Excel, which is frequently because I am poor, I have felt nearly imprisoned by the poor interface, missing functionality, and lack of anyone else to ask when I can't figure something out.
The "version-specific upgrade" thing helps to establish vendor lock-in. And personally, I don't believe in the "the next version of Windows will be the best" mantra anymore, I've heard it too often. For many consumers and commercial users there's hardly a reason to upgrade their office suite for functionality improvements alone (and more often reason not to upgrade). In this case they even use MS Office 2000. The workforce here has apparently been trained to work with OO.o.
It's good that FOSS exists, because competition is important,
But here, it seems, it doesn't exist or isn't good (they do use a number of other 'open source' software packages). This is a case of non-competition.
libre projects lower the barrier-to-entry for aspiring devs, and computers are important enough that gratis options should be available. However, demanding that others use an objectively inferior product on the ideological basis of opposing the industry standard's producer for the cardinal sin of being and acting like a business is much more like what I'd call "oppression." People don't use OpenOffice because it sucks. Leave them alone.
The case doesn't show OO.o is "an objectively inferior product", it doesn't even show whether it's "good enough" or not. It shows the city of Freiburg needs to clear up their IT mess and feels, partly by outside pressure, compelled to standardize on MS Office. It shows that the tool is more important than the product, even when that product isn't 'proprietary'. Their decision will lead to Freiburg becoming another actor to force other organizations to use MS Office, meaning even less competition. Freiburg apparently didn't consider spending some of the license savings to improve the 'open-source' office product. The inhabitants of Freiburg don't have to "leave them alone" in this decision though and I hope they don't (without resorting to zealotry).
I'm old enough to remember when the Rain Forest was the "treasure trove" of new medicines.
Novel approach:
1. take an almost infinite number of monkeys and have them hammer out sequences of GATC to create a vast pool of previously unknown genes,
2....
3. treasure trove.
I'm willing to bet I made the right decision... (I already bet my reputation at work on it)
They're office suites, not presidential candidates. When I entered my sig there wasn't enough space to attribute the quote properly but it's by Simon Phipps. If your "right decision" means you're vendor locked in to Apache OpenOffice, you've still lost the game.
I think your wild, conspiratorial accusations are completely out of line.
The problem is: we don't know. The legal world of IP (judges, lawyers, academia) is pretty small and specialized. The same judges handle the majority of cases, lawyers are also professors. All of them appear on commercial seminars. You can't speak of "wild, conspiratorial accusations" if key players don't try to avoid the suggestion of conflicts of interest.
All we have are the interpretations of law, treaties and precedents. General line: behavior on internet is being molded into the existing IP framework. Specific example from a different case: to the courts there's a difference between a 'link' (not infringing) and a 'deep link' (infringing). That's not to say the every ruling is suspect, in fact most are well researched and well thought even if the conclusion is less desirable, but rulings (and laws, treaties) aren't necessarily realistic, sensible or fair. Judges go far in explaining the law so that, another example, search engines for usenet can be found to be infringing themselves, not just facilitating.
there are a lot of grown ups out in the world who have looked at IP law in general and, while perhaps accepting that there are occasional absurdities and oddities around the edges that do need to be worked out, have concluded that it is fundamentally good.
Here's an oddity to think about: Dutch copyright is based on the exclusive right to publish and multiply a (copyrightable) work. How is that exclusivity possible when talking about computers which do nothing but copying, let alone internet? Is the working of computers and internet "fundamentally" wrong? Or, in this case, is it "fundamentally good" to blame a blog for infringing when it posts a link to leaked material?
Slashdot Mirror
We evolved our phone service into a public broadcasting system.
And wins the Ignoble prize for it.
The one source guaranteed not to be read by mosquitos so they don't know we're on to them yet.
Why would they use a pedaling mechanism instead of a rowing mechanism?
It looks like it's hard enough already to stay nearly stationary.
Mind-blowing.
Post lots of links to malware. Shouldn't be too hard, it's Microsoft snooping.
Don't be so negative. Imagine a bright future where you can 3d-print your own Darwin Award, wouldn't that be nice?
They're probably organized in some way or another already and it's not like they compete on the software they use. Just make sure to keep the requirements low and realistic and that the result is Free or that you own the code.
I suspect it was Vista that marked the beginning of the fall.
I suspect it's more the failure to come with a timely and interesting successor to XP. Vista was 'too little, too late'. It also caused IE to drop market share and happened way before netbooks, tablets or smart phones became a factor.
I thought RMS was tapped as Balmy the Chairthrower's successor.
I object. Don't call atheism a type of religion.
and last month's image search.
It's a pun. Paleontology is literally scratching the surface and they also know relatively little.
Have there been any other books of fiction reviewed on slashdot? I can't remember any.
Refactoring Perl for dummies.
Only a noob needs a French programming language.
Certainly you mean a 'nouveaub'.
I wonder what kind of dating sites you get with a catholic name, or maybe you'll get links for kindergartens straight away.
I'd say IR4 is internet. Robotics is industrial revolution + IT imho.
The next hybrid is computers + internet + physical adaptation. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have already lead to breakthroughs in the medical field and I think we'll see more remarkable developments in neurosurgery.
A forum where every post needs to be prefixed with "IANAL".
There are many examples of the legal system being used to preserve outdated and irrelevant business models that quite clearly fly in the face of expressed consumer demand (RIAA anyone?). This looks like it won't be any exception, unfortunately.
Wait, what? Online advertizing is outdated and irrelevant already? This whole online thing goes way too fast, I can't keep up.
"the yoke of MS oppression"
I present People's Exhibit A showing why everyone thinks open-source zealots are completely nanners.
This here is a case of an organization which wants to use open-source but finds it can't. There are a number of reasons for this, their own ineptitude and internal opposition for starters, failures in interoperability with other organizations too, but still they found they can't get rid of MS Office. It's perhaps far fledged to actually blame MS for this, it shows that it's also far fledged to accuse open-source adepts of zealotry or calling them crazy.
The only time I've ever felt oppressed by things MS does is when they do their idiotic "version-specific upgrade" thing, and when they do that, I can always just wait for the next iteration of Windows that doesn't suck. Office in particular is probably MS's best product, and definitely the best of its kind. Anytime I've ever tried to use something that is not Word or Excel, which is frequently because I am poor, I have felt nearly imprisoned by the poor interface, missing functionality, and lack of anyone else to ask when I can't figure something out.
The "version-specific upgrade" thing helps to establish vendor lock-in. And personally, I don't believe in the "the next version of Windows will be the best" mantra anymore, I've heard it too often. For many consumers and commercial users there's hardly a reason to upgrade their office suite for functionality improvements alone (and more often reason not to upgrade). In this case they even use MS Office 2000. The workforce here has apparently been trained to work with OO.o.
It's good that FOSS exists, because competition is important,
But here, it seems, it doesn't exist or isn't good (they do use a number of other 'open source' software packages). This is a case of non-competition.
libre projects lower the barrier-to-entry for aspiring devs, and computers are important enough that gratis options should be available. However, demanding that others use an objectively inferior product on the ideological basis of opposing the industry standard's producer for the cardinal sin of being and acting like a business is much more like what I'd call "oppression." People don't use OpenOffice because it sucks. Leave them alone.
The case doesn't show OO.o is "an objectively inferior product", it doesn't even show whether it's "good enough" or not. It shows the city of Freiburg needs to clear up their IT mess and feels, partly by outside pressure, compelled to standardize on MS Office. It shows that the tool is more important than the product, even when that product isn't 'proprietary'. Their decision will lead to Freiburg becoming another actor to force other organizations to use MS Office, meaning even less competition. Freiburg apparently didn't consider spending some of the license savings to improve the 'open-source' office product. The inhabitants of Freiburg don't have to "leave them alone" in this decision though and I hope they don't (without resorting to zealotry).
I'm old enough to remember when the Rain Forest was the "treasure trove" of new medicines.
Novel approach: ...
1. take an almost infinite number of monkeys and have them hammer out sequences of GATC to create a vast pool of previously unknown genes,
2.
3. treasure trove.
-1 Insightful? How does that work?
Read "insight fool".
I'm willing to bet I made the right decision... (I already bet my reputation at work on it)
They're office suites, not presidential candidates. When I entered my sig there wasn't enough space to attribute the quote properly but it's by Simon Phipps. If your "right decision" means you're vendor locked in to Apache OpenOffice, you've still lost the game.
Just a footnote in the history of lying^w mankind.
I think your wild, conspiratorial accusations are completely out of line.
The problem is: we don't know. The legal world of IP (judges, lawyers, academia) is pretty small and specialized. The same judges handle the majority of cases, lawyers are also professors. All of them appear on commercial seminars. You can't speak of "wild, conspiratorial accusations" if key players don't try to avoid the suggestion of conflicts of interest.
All we have are the interpretations of law, treaties and precedents. General line: behavior on internet is being molded into the existing IP framework. Specific example from a different case: to the courts there's a difference between a 'link' (not infringing) and a 'deep link' (infringing). That's not to say the every ruling is suspect, in fact most are well researched and well thought even if the conclusion is less desirable, but rulings (and laws, treaties) aren't necessarily realistic, sensible or fair. Judges go far in explaining the law so that, another example, search engines for usenet can be found to be infringing themselves, not just facilitating.
there are a lot of grown ups out in the world who have looked at IP law in general and, while perhaps accepting that there are occasional absurdities and oddities around the edges that do need to be worked out, have concluded that it is fundamentally good.
Here's an oddity to think about: Dutch copyright is based on the exclusive right to publish and multiply a (copyrightable) work. How is that exclusivity possible when talking about computers which do nothing but copying, let alone internet? Is the working of computers and internet "fundamentally" wrong? Or, in this case, is it "fundamentally good" to blame a blog for infringing when it posts a link to leaked material?