In the most basic of generlizations, all endevors can be borken into science or art.
Science is about discovery, research. If your findinng out how something works - its science. That could be astronomy, physics, math. I could also be reverse engineering somthing - in essence physicics are reverse engineering the universe. It can also be sitting on a pillow doped up just thinking - philosophy.
Art is about creation. Taking what the physicsts and philosophers have come up with and making something out of it. It could be a bridge for CE's. It could be a symphony for musicians. And it could be code for programmers.
It isnt, however a performing art, nor a graphic art (wtf do you call [paintings+sculptures+...]?). We generaly dont apperecate structures for there engeneering aspects. They might look good, but only other ring knockers can realy understand its structure.
But the real distinction here is utility. One generaly gets some utility from a bridge or a program. The only utility you get from more traditional art forms is emotional and prehaps spirtualy utility. Using linux or the result of other open source programs dose not give me a warm and fuccy feeling. However, knowing how it was build does. The methods - open source - dont give me any practical utility, they do give me emotional utility thouugh. Therefor they can only be Art.
I think he was concerned with hardware support for linux, and pc's in general. The later is a definit problem, only because firewire isnt that common yet. But cards do exist, Im sure. Drivers for linux? I dont know.
Is there a good software package for doing profesional quaility stuff? I realy dont think so. But someone made the point that if your going to be spending somewhere in the $10K range on cameras and decks you may as well shell out for some software.
Neither, because they both retained editorial control.
No, slashdot is not freshmeat.
No, you dont see news stories on freshmeat.
I dont use linux (or any unix) on my desktop - though a "long term goal" is to migrate over. So I dont read freshmeat randomly - there are too many gminsweapers and the like to weed through.. I proably wont randomy go there when I do uses gnome on my desktop, either.
Apache is important. I maintain some sites that run linux and use apache. Its nice to know.
A Be gtk port is less important (to me) but there are proably lots of Be users who dont run linux and gnome, but like some of what they see. They would be interested in something like this.
Besides, its not like there is a hundred stories a day on./ Do you realy think that these displaced something more important?
AGP is cool when compared to 32bit PCI that you can get with a 32bit processor. Yes, 64bit PCI exists - its in Alphas (and Sun's?) and its also runs at a faster buss speed - that is its 100mHz insted of 66mHz.
But you cant use a 64bit expansion card with a 32bit processor. So something else had to solve the bandwidth problem of PCI32.
Hopefuly, when 64bit intels come on the street Ill be able to plug in insanly fast sun or alpha videocards. 4d60t *growl*
So, NT5/Win2000 has a big chance at being the "NetWare 4" of the early 00s LAN -- A good portion of the installed base might just skip the upgrade or switch to a less complex and cheaper alternative.
Or when the suits are looking at w2k theyll realise they proably want Netware 5 with NDS 8: because that is a proven directory. Which works with there solaris boxes and there linux boxes/and/ there NT boxes...
There is no paticular reason for MS to hurry to deploy win2k.
Big businesses are not going to buy it now, anyway, there IT people are ocupied with y2k related stuff. MS is not stupid, thell just keep it in beta till second quarter '00 when they might actuly sell some copies.
If Free Software can offer home users one less bill they have to pay, that's a big bonus for it. The bill is for the service of having the spftware there, and you just have to click on it to use it. No looking around for software. No downloading or doing to the store. No installing. No upgrading
The problem that this is 'solving' is a problem that is even worse (generaly) with sourceware than on the consumer side.
If there was a way to push down software to my desktop, and it just work, and its constantly upgraded, and its at a resonable cost, I might sign on. Weather its shrink wraped, or open.
Its here, now. In (paticular areas of) Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick the local telcos via there xDSL internet connections already provide software on demand for a cost.
Some of its per time, some is per use, some per month. Im not sure of what paticular packages are aviable: even though Im running 'blows on one machine, I dont even as much as have the novell client installed. And Im a fucking CNA:)
I wonder how microsoft plans on pusing the software down? The would have to get themselves a copy of ZENWorks....
The product of security multiplied by convenience is a constant.
What is more convient that putting your finger on the scanner imbeded in your keyboard and nothing else to login? How is that insecure? You cant steal my finger.
When it comes down to it, what your talking about is authentication. Authentication is the root of all security, proving to something (or someone) that you are who you say you are.
There are three forms of authentication. Something you have, something you know, and something you are. The first is something like a key, or a (magnetic stripe on a) credit card. You use a key to authenticate yourself to a door, or the ignition on your car. You might use a mag stripe to do the same, open a door.
Something you know, is a password, or a pin, simple enough.
Something you are is biometrics. Fingerprint scans, retina scans, facial recognition, DNA, etc.
Good authentication requires two of these, preferably one being biometrics. Toe get money out of a ATM you need to have a bank card, and you need to know your PIN. To enter a secure room you may need all three, a PIN, a mag card, and a guard to match your face to the picture on your ID badge.
Since remembering a password is hard (*cough*) people given the choice will choose easy passwords, or not, write it down and tape it to there monitors. Either method doesn't help security at all. If logins in requires a fingerprint scan instead of a password, then your double better. Finger print scans are more secure to break then good passwords and you can't tape your finger to your monitor.
Its not impossible to make a system that is both easy to use and secure. Unfortunately systems are never both because sysadmins and developers don't realize that users will subvert security if its hard to use.
1. no one would hack any system, most files on most systems are not very interesting and if there were no challange in cracking them no one would bother.
If you actualy read the artivle, you would know that attacks come from 'scrit kiddies' There is no challange for them now. They would continue to attach networks for fun.
2. Sysadmins would have time for more interesting things than building barricades around the systems. more work would get done.
Sysadmins would spend 100% of there time fighting fires from the lack of security, and no work would get done. Even if the network is never attacked, they still would be fixing probem caused by lack of security. Another reason for security is to pervent internal users from donig what thet shouldnt. Imagine if everyone could 'rm -rf/'
3. if someone really needed to get access to some machine he wouldn't be stop by security measures (I have some files on that machine but I don't have access anymore and all my important work has to wait until tomorrow when the sysadmin comes bck in)
Did you not read about grey networks? Secure data will migrate to insecure networks. Secure work will be done on grey boxes. And you seem to be implying that the sysadmin has supreme access to both networks. In anything but a day old unix box, sysadmin provilages aer fragmented and customized to individule admins. Its hard to do this with the default security model on unix or NT. Thats what NDS is for. unix is a all or nothing with suid's hacked in on top, NT by default grants everyone all access, and you havwe to expilicity deny rights. Only NDS on netware (or solaris, nt or cladara (?)) works sainly with ACL's and stuff.
They should just release the whole damn MacOS X. Sure, some people would port it to cheaper Intel hardware, costing Apple revenue, but most people would run MOSX on G3/G4 hardware, and MOSX would kick butt even more if it were open-source. Its OSS development would be particularly fast since a) most OSS developers are already familiar with Mach & BSD, and b) this is so political.
Why dont they do this with the exception that your not allowed to release code modified to make it run on non Apple hardware. This might not quailfy as OpenSource but it would definitly be opensource.
They should just release the whole damn MacOS X. Sure, some people would port it to cheaper Intel hardware, costing Apple revenue, but most people would run MOSX on G3/G4 hardware, and MOSX would kick butt even more if it were open-source. Its OSS development would be particularly fast since a) most OSS developers are already familiar with Mach & BSD, and b) this is so political.
Why dont they do this with the exception that your not allowed to release code modified to make it run on non Apple hardware. This might not quailfy as OpenSource but it would definitly be opensource.
Because iMacs are aimed at normal people. Non-computer types. People who are buying a first computer.
Other mac users are generaly long time mac users, and if they dont know a lot about them (say there just/users/... DTP people) then they proably have a on site mac guy - officialy or not.
Any failure, no matter how trivial would be incomprenehable to a first timer, but a lot of DOA problems can be easily fixed by people with a little bit of experience.
And no other company is realy selling cash and carry computers marketed at newbies. Sould othercompanies do this - build and market computers for the brain dead? Thats a compleatly different issue....
Well, I dont know how well it scales up to a PIII but according to the lips of a Cyrix rep there 6x86s cost about $80/unit to manufacture. And this was way back when they were done more-or-less by hand. (well, in a test lab as oposed to a plant)
So I find it unlikely that the per unit cost of a PIII is much more that $100.
Ah yes, but what about R&d? I find it unlikely that there are more than, say, 100 people actualy R&D'n a paticular chip. And even if the cosy of a person-year of R&D is 1/4 million (salaries, management, computers, pencils, free coke(-a-cola) etc) then thats only $25million/year, proably no more that $50mil to develope a new chip. Not a realy large amount of cash.
Billion dollar plants, now thats another story, but they have a life expectancy of what? 25 years? Intel isnt closing down there 5 year old plants:)
Intel hasent ever had any competition, they have just set arbartry prices. Only now after a halfdozen years from Cyrix and AMD is Intel feeling any pain, and there doing what should be done in any healthy market: setting there prices to be in line with the competition. They do have deeper pockets, and they do have a larger market share so they dont have to make as much profit on a per unit basis.
And besides, AMD is worthless unless they build a surounding chipset.
It been pussy footed around but no one has hit it on the head: The important difference beteween FSF and OSI is that the goal of FSF is to create free (speech and beer) software, and the goal of OSI is to create better software.
The only people who can care about (or understand) free (beer/speech) software is programers. Everyone else couldnt care less. If your not a mechanic you dont care if you can open up you engine and fiddle around.
Everyone can understand the promis of better products. Everyone wants better products.
RMS is hard enough to agree with (on a personal level), and when he is speeking of freedoms that you cant understand (or do, but dont care about) then is east to ignore. ESRs message can be grasped by everyone - and it has been.
Your missing the point... With a sufficiant user base, there is likely someone with the same point of view as you. And with good moderation, the desier to post will return.
The literary quality here has droped to the point of bathroom stalls. With moderation clued people will want to post. Other clued people will reply. And as a moderator, you are more important because your responsible for higlighting the best
Look at computer books, even technicial computer books. Proably 50% of them are crap, and thats only the published ones. Proably 95% of compputer books writen suck, and only the top 90% are published. Look at ORA books. There always the best. They solocit good authors, and they publish good independents. If Im looking for a book, and know nothing on the topic, and there is a ORA book, then I buy the ORA book. In effect they moderate out all the crap, and guarentee ony good stuff.
Novell seems to be very nice to there old customers, and supprts there old products for a long time... 3.x is getting close to a decade old, and they released 3.2, the y2k fix. M$ has openly said that they are not going to even bother trying to patch win3.1
What would M$ gain from fixing 3.1? They would spend a lot of mony, and make none. By not fixing it they dont spend any money, and make lots by forcing people to upgrade.
Novell could have done exactly the same thing with NW3.1x
Well opensource is a lot of things... But for the *best* stuff you have to pay money. 95% of people dont necessaraly need that kind of bleeding edge, or power, but if you do, then pay for it. Either cash up front to a vendor, or by adding the "the movement"
Apache may be cool, rock solid, fast and it might talk to a lot of things, buut its nott the best.
having access to the source is all but essential. But unless your a programer, your equaly screwed. Who is to say that the infinite monkeys working on your selected project will get to adding your feature before the money guys? If itll make a lot ot people happy, companies will do it to make money, and itll be done to opensource either dirrectly by people with that problem, or others 'cause its cool.
It runs Groupwise, which is by all accounts better than Exchange (and dose stuff xchange couldn't dream of).
It runs bordermanager, which Novell says is the best firewalll/proxy/cache on the market. (and for commercial stuff, thats proably prety close to true.
It runs (all?) Netscape servers.
It runs Perl and Java.
There is no need to port apachee to.nlm, FastTrack comes with the base install. Orcale comes with a 5 user license.
And besides, it makes a hell of a lot more sense putting NDS on a backend (unix, or even a mainframe) box than putting backend apps on PC hardware...
From a user stand point, and from a administrators standpoint, individule servers, and the operating system they run should be irrelevent. Use the network, login to the network, admin the network. With ZENworks and groupwise, you can just about forget file management too: administer application objects, and save files to a database with revision control / multi authors.
Samba might be cool because you can do 9x and NT file shares, but 9x and NT file shares suck. Nothing else can do what Novell stuff can do.
Slashdot Mirror
If you dont put your name on your works then you shouldnt expect your works to be recogonised.
Science is about discovery, research. If your findinng out how something works - its science. That could be astronomy, physics, math. I could also be reverse engineering somthing - in essence physicics are reverse engineering the universe. It can also be sitting on a pillow doped up just thinking - philosophy.
Art is about creation. Taking what the physicsts and philosophers have come up with and making something out of it. It could be a bridge for CE's. It could be a symphony for musicians. And it could be code for programmers.
It isnt, however a performing art, nor a graphic art (wtf do you call [paintings+sculptures+...]?). We generaly dont apperecate structures for there engeneering aspects. They might look good, but only other ring knockers can realy understand its structure.
But the real distinction here is utility. One generaly gets some utility from a bridge or a program. The only utility you get from more traditional art forms is emotional and prehaps spirtualy utility. Using linux or the result of other open source programs dose not give me a warm and fuccy feeling. However, knowing how it was build does. The methods - open source - dont give me any practical utility, they do give me emotional utility thouugh. Therefor they can only be Art.
Is there a good software package for doing profesional quaility stuff? I realy dont think so. But someone made the point that if your going to be spending somewhere in the $10K range on cameras and decks you may as well shell out for some software.
No, slashdot is not freshmeat.
No, you dont see news stories on freshmeat.
I dont use linux (or any unix) on my desktop - though a "long term goal" is to migrate over. So I dont read freshmeat randomly - there are too many gminsweapers and the like to weed through.. I proably wont randomy go there when I do uses gnome on my desktop, either.
Apache is important. I maintain some sites that run linux and use apache. Its nice to know.
A Be gtk port is less important (to me) but there are proably lots of Be users who dont run linux and gnome, but like some of what they see. They would be interested in something like this.
Besides, its not like there is a hundred stories a day on ./ Do you realy think that these displaced something more important?
But you cant use a 64bit expansion card with a 32bit processor. So something else had to solve the bandwidth problem of PCI32.
Hopefuly, when 64bit intels come on the street Ill be able to plug in insanly fast sun or alpha videocards. 4d60t *growl*
Or when the suits are looking at w2k theyll realise they proably want Netware 5 with NDS 8: because that is a proven directory. Which works with there solaris boxes and there linux boxes /and/ there NT boxes...
Big businesses are not going to buy it now, anyway, there IT people are ocupied with y2k related stuff. MS is not stupid, thell just keep it in beta till second quarter '00 when they might actuly sell some copies.
The problem that this is 'solving' is a problem that is even worse (generaly) with sourceware than on the consumer side.
If there was a way to push down software to my desktop, and it just work, and its constantly upgraded, and its at a resonable cost, I might sign on. Weather its shrink wraped, or open.
Your paying for a convience.
Some of its per time, some is per use, some per month. Im not sure of what paticular packages are aviable: even though Im running 'blows on one machine, I dont even as much as have the novell client installed. And Im a fucking CNA :)
I wonder how microsoft plans on pusing the software down? The would have to get themselves a copy of ZENWorks....
What is more convient that putting your finger on the scanner imbeded in your keyboard and nothing else to login? How is that insecure? You cant steal my finger.
There are three forms of authentication. Something you have, something you know, and something you are. The first is something like a key, or a (magnetic stripe on a) credit card. You use a key to authenticate yourself to a door, or the ignition on your car. You might use a mag stripe to do the same, open a door.
Something you know, is a password, or a pin, simple enough.
Something you are is biometrics. Fingerprint scans, retina scans, facial recognition, DNA, etc.
Good authentication requires two of these, preferably one being biometrics. Toe get money out of a ATM you need to have a bank card, and you need to know your PIN. To enter a secure room you may need all three, a PIN, a mag card, and a guard to match your face to the picture on your ID badge.
Since remembering a password is hard (*cough*) people given the choice will choose easy passwords, or not, write it down and tape it to there monitors. Either method doesn't help security at all. If logins in requires a fingerprint scan instead of a password, then your double better. Finger print scans are more secure to break then good passwords and you can't tape your finger to your monitor.
Its not impossible to make a system that is both easy to use and secure. Unfortunately systems are never both because sysadmins and developers don't realize that users will subvert security if its hard to use.
Suppose that all systems were open, then:
1. no one would hack any system, most files on most systems are not very interesting and if there were no challange in cracking them no one would bother.
If you actualy read the artivle, you would know that attacks come from 'scrit kiddies' There is no challange for them now. They would continue to attach networks for fun.
2. Sysadmins would have time for more interesting things than building barricades around the systems. more work would get done.
Sysadmins would spend 100% of there time fighting fires from the lack of security, and no work would get done. Even if the network is never attacked, they still would be fixing probem caused by lack of security. Another reason for security is to pervent internal users from donig what thet shouldnt. Imagine if everyone could 'rm -rf /'
3. if someone really needed to get access to some machine he wouldn't be stop by security measures (I have some files on that machine but I don't have access anymore and all my important work has to wait until tomorrow when the sysadmin comes bck in)
Did you not read about grey networks? Secure data will migrate to insecure networks. Secure work will be done on grey boxes. And you seem to be implying that the sysadmin has supreme access to both networks. In anything but a day old unix box, sysadmin provilages aer fragmented and customized to individule admins. Its hard to do this with the default security model on unix or NT. Thats what NDS is for. unix is a all or nothing with suid's hacked in on top, NT by default grants everyone all access, and you havwe to expilicity deny rights. Only NDS on netware (or solaris, nt or cladara (?)) works sainly with ACL's and stuff.
Why dont they do this with the exception that your not allowed to release code modified to make it run on non Apple hardware. This might not quailfy as OpenSource but it would definitly be opensource.
Why dont they do this with the exception that your not allowed to release code modified to make it run on non Apple hardware. This might not quailfy as OpenSource but it would definitly be opensource.
Other mac users are generaly long time mac users, and if they dont know a lot about them (say there just /users/... DTP people) then they proably have a on site mac guy - officialy or not.
Any failure, no matter how trivial would be incomprenehable to a first timer, but a lot of DOA problems can be easily fixed by people with a little bit of experience.
And no other company is realy selling cash and carry computers marketed at newbies. Sould othercompanies do this - build and market computers for the brain dead? Thats a compleatly different issue....
To knock loose a pixel of wall to eat... I requires a realy big tilt though :)
So I find it unlikely that the per unit cost of a PIII is much more that $100.
Ah yes, but what about R&d? I find it unlikely that there are more than, say, 100 people actualy R&D'n a paticular chip. And even if the cosy of a person-year of R&D is 1/4 million (salaries, management, computers, pencils, free coke(-a-cola) etc) then thats only $25million/year, proably no more that $50mil to develope a new chip. Not a realy large amount of cash.
Billion dollar plants, now thats another story, but they have a life expectancy of what? 25 years? Intel isnt closing down there 5 year old plants :)
Intel hasent ever had any competition, they have just set arbartry prices. Only now after a halfdozen years from Cyrix and AMD is Intel feeling any pain, and there doing what should be done in any healthy market: setting there prices to be in line with the competition. They do have deeper pockets, and they do have a larger market share so they dont have to make as much profit on a per unit basis.
And besides, AMD is worthless unless they build a surounding chipset.
The only people who can care about (or understand) free (beer/speech) software is programers. Everyone else couldnt care less. If your not a mechanic you dont care if you can open up you engine and fiddle around.
Everyone can understand the promis of better products. Everyone wants better products.
RMS is hard enough to agree with (on a personal level), and when he is speeking of freedoms that you cant understand (or do, but dont care about) then is east to ignore. ESRs message can be grasped by everyone - and it has been.
They physcial side of SCSI is exactly the same as with IDE: new stuff is put into higher end drives first, and higher end drives have SCSI interfases.
The reason why SCSI drivers are at 10k and IDE is at 7200 is because people who want/need/can afford 10K drives have SCSI, anyway.
That would be cool.
The literary quality here has droped to the point of bathroom stalls. With moderation clued people will want to post. Other clued people will reply. And as a moderator, you are more important because your responsible for higlighting the best
Look at computer books, even technicial computer books. Proably 50% of them are crap, and thats only the published ones. Proably 95% of compputer books writen suck, and only the top 90% are published. Look at ORA books. There always the best. They solocit good authors, and they publish good independents. If Im looking for a book, and know nothing on the topic, and there is a ORA book, then I buy the ORA book. In effect they moderate out all the crap, and guarentee ony good stuff.
What would M$ gain from fixing 3.1? They would spend a lot of mony, and make none. By not fixing it they dont spend any money, and make lots by forcing people to upgrade.
Novell could have done exactly the same thing with NW3.1x
Apache may be cool, rock solid, fast and it might talk to a lot of things, buut its nott the best.
having access to the source is all but essential. But unless your a programer, your equaly screwed. Who is to say that the infinite monkeys working on your selected project will get to adding your feature before the money guys? If itll make a lot ot people happy, companies will do it to make money, and itll be done to opensource either dirrectly by people with that problem, or others 'cause its cool.
It runs Groupwise, which is by all accounts better than Exchange (and dose stuff xchange couldn't dream of).
It runs bordermanager, which Novell says is the best firewalll/proxy/cache on the market. (and for commercial stuff, thats proably prety close to true.
It runs (all?) Netscape servers.
It runs Perl and Java.
There is no need to port apachee to .nlm, FastTrack comes with the base install. Orcale comes with a 5 user license.
And besides, it makes a hell of a lot more sense putting NDS on a backend (unix, or even a mainframe) box than putting backend apps on PC hardware...
From a user stand point, and from a administrators standpoint, individule servers, and the operating system they run should be irrelevent. Use the network, login to the network, admin the network. With ZENworks and groupwise, you can just about forget file management too: administer application objects, and save files to a database with revision control / multi authors.
Samba might be cool because you can do 9x and NT file shares, but 9x and NT file shares suck. Nothing else can do what Novell stuff can do.