Firefox is making great progress. It's the browser of choice among the most web savvy, the blogosphere. And they are 90% Windows users. But Firefox's accepted superiority is just too recent to worry about its acceptance. Firefox 1.0 came out Nov 2004. Only a few years old.
IE achieved domination vs Netscape which was showing its age. Even most netscape loyalists agreed that netscape couldn't compete on technical merit. Mozilla Suite was too bloated, especially for those who used another email app.
is not that this is something new. hey I'm all for making things easier. My problem is that Microsoft Office now looks and acts completely different than any other app on the platform. Windows UI guidelines are thrown out the window so you now have 2 different UI's to deal with. If Microsoft really cared about usability, we would have new UI guidelines so all apps would be consistent.
how would people download firefox from the internet without IE with Windows? Firefox is good. people know about it and are downloading it. I don't think we have to tell Microsoft what to do in order to give firefox a chance.
because the OS that 95% used was only for x86. yes I know NT was available for other platforms but most people didn't use NT. Windows 3.1, 95 and XP are what mattered. If all versions of Windows were available for other platforms, they would've competed with intel and would be much better alternatives than they are today
in this case, these patents help protect Microsoft's competitors. Since it is unlikely patents will be abolished completely, Microsoft will have the best of both worlds if they win. That's the problem of incrementalism.
Microsoft is very smart and crafty. They will come up with a Microsoft Linux if that is what it will take to win. And they will use that embrace, extend, extinguish strategy to knock the rest of the F/OSS community. We already see this happening with Novell.
I know people who don't know anything about Star Wars and they are perfectly fine.:)
"It isn't "their work", it is everybody's work. Content creators are simply given a temporary monopoly by the government."
One could say that the government gives a temporary monopoly to anything you have. That money you think you have? Comes from the government. That doesn't mean everyone else has the right to take it from you.
"I think it would be great if people didn't have an incentive to create junk like Star Wars--and make no mistake about it, Star Wars is simply the product of a money making machinery with little artistic or cultural value. But given that it's out there and has become part of our culture, we all have to know about it, whether we like it or not."
From a cultural, artistic standpoint it is junk. I think it's just fun entertainment and shouldn't be placed in the same lofty category with Shakespeare and Mozart. That's real culture and works of similar caliber simply won't be DRM candidates in the first place.
you don't need star wars. Really, you don't. If star wars cost $2000 I can't afford that. So I just don't buy it and won't miss it. DRM is another cost, just not expressed in dollars and cents. If it's too much for you then you don't have it. You have no right to tell artists what they should do with their work. What will happen is they will simply not produce anything. So either way you won't get star wars.
"-It's folly to base your opinion on one aspect of anything. You're obviously a gamer, and some of your choice games aren't made for Linux. Personally, I'm not into running on the gaming treadmill. I'd like to know a game is good before I spend my cash on it. A key to this decision is to see that gamers like it enough to request a Linux version."
Reminds me of that Mac switch parody. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2282754844 569110939 Of course, Photoshop is not a game and not for linux either. I guess it's not good enough because there aren't enough linux users demanding a port.
The problem isn't just whether linux is a user friendly OS. the apps must also be user friendly and better than the best Windows apps in order to convince people to drop Windows. That is why I think it is more important to work on replacing their apps with Windows apps that are better and also run on linux. It's very unrealistic to get most people to switch OS but apps are easier. Games...ok that is a big problem but you should still be able to get your work done no matter what OS-that's a realistic but challenging goal.
the problem is this certainly applies to Windows which is what both solaris and linux are competing with. Microsoft isn't worried about a 'good enough' linux even though it's free.
yes but linux even with wine can't guarantee compatibility with the thousands of windows apps that are used. Either way you will have to sacrifice in order to switch
it always made sense to me to have both online and offline storage so if my hard drive goes out or if the web is down, I can still get to my stuff. So I set my gmail to use pop and download it from thunderbird, which is open source and on any platform I happen to bump into.
Slashdot Mirror
rather KDE is the OS and KDE becomes more relevant. Especially if it's not going to be default on most linux systems....it's the way to go for them
Firefox is making great progress. It's the browser of choice among the most web savvy, the blogosphere. And they are 90% Windows users. But Firefox's accepted superiority is just too recent to worry about its acceptance. Firefox 1.0 came out Nov 2004. Only a few years old.
IE achieved domination vs Netscape which was showing its age. Even most netscape loyalists agreed that netscape couldn't compete on technical merit. Mozilla Suite was too bloated, especially for those who used another email app.
is not that this is something new. hey I'm all for making things easier. My problem is that Microsoft Office now looks and acts completely different than any other app on the platform. Windows UI guidelines are thrown out the window so you now have 2 different UI's to deal with. If Microsoft really cared about usability, we would have new UI guidelines so all apps would be consistent.
how would people download firefox from the internet without IE with Windows? Firefox is good. people know about it and are downloading it. I don't think we have to tell Microsoft what to do in order to give firefox a chance.
because the OS that 95% used was only for x86. yes I know NT was available for other platforms but most people didn't use NT. Windows 3.1, 95 and XP are what mattered. If all versions of Windows were available for other platforms, they would've competed with intel and would be much better alternatives than they are today
because Intel offers a compiler and guaranteed availability
Microsoft has concern for usability? That's news to me.
in this case, these patents help protect Microsoft's competitors. Since it is unlikely patents will be abolished completely, Microsoft will have the best of both worlds if they win. That's the problem of incrementalism.
Microsoft is very smart and crafty. They will come up with a Microsoft Linux if that is what it will take to win. And they will use that embrace, extend, extinguish strategy to knock the rest of the F/OSS community. We already see this happening with Novell.
I have a better idea. just get the Big Bad Wolf to huff and puff and cool your PC
hopefully Apple won't explode because those MOAB's...they sure blow up reeeeeeal goood
I know people who don't know anything about Star Wars and they are perfectly fine. :)
"It isn't "their work", it is everybody's work. Content creators are simply given a temporary monopoly by the government."
One could say that the government gives a temporary monopoly to anything you have. That money you think you have? Comes from the government. That doesn't mean everyone else has the right to take it from you.
"I think it would be great if people didn't have an incentive to create junk like Star Wars--and make no mistake about it, Star Wars is simply the product of a money making machinery with little artistic or cultural value. But given that it's out there and has become part of our culture, we all have to know about it, whether we like it or not."
From a cultural, artistic standpoint it is junk. I think it's just fun entertainment and shouldn't be placed in the same lofty category with Shakespeare and Mozart. That's real culture and works of similar caliber simply won't be DRM candidates in the first place.
looks more like the year of the Xbox PC. :/
you don't need star wars. Really, you don't. If star wars cost $2000 I can't afford that. So I just don't buy it and won't miss it. DRM is another cost, just not expressed in dollars and cents. If it's too much for you then you don't have it. You have no right to tell artists what they should do with their work. What will happen is they will simply not produce anything. So either way you won't get star wars.
"-It's folly to base your opinion on one aspect of anything. You're obviously a gamer, and some of your choice games aren't made for Linux. Personally, I'm not into running on the gaming treadmill. I'd like to know a game is good before I spend my cash on it. A key to this decision is to see that gamers like it enough to request a Linux version." Reminds me of that Mac switch parody. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2282754844 569110939 Of course, Photoshop is not a game and not for linux either. I guess it's not good enough because there aren't enough linux users demanding a port.
The problem isn't just whether linux is a user friendly OS. the apps must also be user friendly and better than the best Windows apps in order to convince people to drop Windows. That is why I think it is more important to work on replacing their apps with Windows apps that are better and also run on linux. It's very unrealistic to get most people to switch OS but apps are easier. Games...ok that is a big problem but you should still be able to get your work done no matter what OS-that's a realistic but challenging goal.
the problem is this certainly applies to Windows which is what both solaris and linux are competing with. Microsoft isn't worried about a 'good enough' linux even though it's free.
not necessarily. I've found that firefox adoption is china and india is very small. those are 2 very big countries and very pro microsoft and IE
yes but linux even with wine can't guarantee compatibility with the thousands of windows apps that are used. Either way you will have to sacrifice in order to switch
they can gain some but there is a natural limit to macosx adoption when only Apple makes hardware that can run it.
the problem is that Windows can do boring office stuff *and* killer games for fun
it always made sense to me to have both online and offline storage so if my hard drive goes out or if the web is down, I can still get to my stuff. So I set my gmail to use pop and download it from thunderbird, which is open source and on any platform I happen to bump into.
He did. Deut 4:9-10
the price is that in 5 years, none of their important documents will work
if there was one, it probably went broke. And I'm sure blake would very happy to see a firefox "tip" by google...guess that's out of the question now.