Given that, why would anyone ever switch to Linux or other free M$ alternatives? You are saying that such a person would have no reasonable expactation(sic) of safety, and even if they were assured it was safe, their is no-one to hold accountable should that not be true.
<RANT>
The fact of the matter is that Linux and all the usual tools (both GPL and BSD licensed) have ironclad disclaimers of liability in their licenses. I consider having to accept those disclaimers in order to use the software at little, or no, cost to be a pretty fair deal.
Microsoft has even more stringent and detailed disclaimers in the licenses they apply to Windows, Office, Money and all the other software they sell, yet they expect me to give up a large and growing amount of both my money and my freedom to do what I wish with my computer in order to use their products.
Trying to avoid creating flamage, I'll leave the discussion of the relative technical merits of the two products, but I WOULD like to ask...
Which deal to you think is more fair, 1) no money/no guarantee, 2) or lots of money/no guarantee?
Microsoft and all the other shrink-wrapped software houses have created a situation where they can charge what they want for their product while they remain immune from any liability for damage that their product might cause (How much do you think the wasted bandwidth burned by Code Red/nimda cost? My guess is in the billions.). Hell, they don't even guarantee it will run at all.
The proprietary software houses are making the railroad robber barons look like a bunch of kindergartners.
</RANT>
In a primarily Windows desktop environment that may be true... In a primarily Unix desktop environment like I work in, Windows is the one with the interoperability problem.
Maybe due to all the recent flaws in the kernel...
Okay, I'll grant you there was a problem with 2.4.11 and a NASTY bug in 2.4.15, but at least Linus publicizes its bugs and gets a fix out as quickly as possible, as opposed to your favorite monopoly OS company which is trying its best to hide them...
... and the mass migration from Unix to Windows 2000/XP...
Say WHAT? I don't know the source of your information, but I've got news for you. The only mass migration to Win2K I've seen is from Win9x/Me/NT. As for XP, I don't know of a single case of anyone voluntarily switching to it.
... the developers are realizing that windows is a better operating system.
Maybe this is the reason why all the computer science courses at the university I work at are taught under... errrmmm... UNIX!
Re:By your silly definition, Mr. Editor,
on
Freedom or Power?
·
· Score: 1
Well, if you're going to participate in the debate, you have to attack the points made under the definition given for those terms, or you have to attack the definitions themself.
RMS's logic can be attacked within the framework of defined terms that he, himself, has espoused. Any experienced debater will tell you that this is absolutely THE most effective attack.
When I first read his piece a couple of weeks back, it was my understanding that Freedom 0 (in the software context) was the base freedom upon which everything else would be built.
This interpretation stems from the following chain of logic:
I right a piece of code that becomes (in my mind) the next "killer app"... I OWN that code lock, stock and main()... nobody else has a copy of it or even any idea about the functionality I've created... it is ALL mine... now I have a decision to make...
I can keep it to myself... in which case, it will never realize it's potential as a "killer app", I can sell it, or I can give it away (in truth there exist more than just that one shade of gray (sell it) in between the black (keep it to myself) and the white (give it away), but for the argument, we're simplifying)
Now, who has the right to decide what I do?
O'Reilly and ESR say the decision is mine (I tend to agree)... Stahlman says it's HIS right to tell me what to do... not only is it morally wrong for me to sell this product of my imagination, it is morally wrong for me to keep it to myself!
This debate over a developer's right to choose is a rather recent development... IIRC, it only began with the rise of the OSI and ESR's ascendancy (and challenge to RMS's primacy) as an OSS/FS spokesman. For my money (as both a user and a developer), I'd rather have Eric guarding my freedom than Richard. The way the debate has developed, Eric would allow me, as a user, to choose between the alternatives, Stahlman acts as if there IS no alternative. As a developer, Eric would let me license my software any way I wished. Richard says I use GPL or I act immorally. From one who falls on both sides of the equation, I find that MY freedom is maximized by ESR's point of view, and, ignoring my puny development efforts, as a consumer of software, I find that my own freedom is again maximized under the Raymond/O'Reilly plan.
Give it up Richard. Your grab for power over developers will never work. I am a Free/Open Source Software advocate, but your rhetoric is no longer convincing, even to me. The question is not "Whose freedom do we maximize?" it is "How is freedom maximized?" The answer is obvious.
As I recall, one of the celebrated victories of the FSF was when they took on Steve Jobs for expropriating a major portion of the gcc code tree to build Objective C for the Next Cube.
Ask Steve about the financial disparity between Stahlman and the corps.
Won't this just encourage corporations to sue over copyright infringement even more?
No. First, the WTO isn't a corporation, it's an association of governments, therefore, it is arguable that they can't even own copyrights except in the capacity of a trustee for their citizens.
Second, there has to be copyrighted material on the site to the extent that it falls outside the "fair-use" doctrine, which, in the case of parody, is a broad sword, indeed. I haven't heard any news about Microsoft getting ready to sue the owner of www.fuckmicrosoft.com, even though the graphics on the site are damn near a direct knockoff of microsoft.com
Third, don't confuse "look and feel" with copyright... "look and feel" issues are generally dealt with in a body of law more closely akin to trademark law than copyright.
... what would bar these people from doing the same?
Three words... Apple was losing. That's why they settled with Microsoft on VERY generous (to Microsoft) terms.
But with out full disclosure, a vunerability becomes something that can be put off till later.
Errrrmmmm... IIRC, this is EXACTLY what happened.
For all the vitriol that has been slung on eEye for their alleged contribution to the Code Red/nimda plague, they reported the holes they found in IIS 5, with proof-of-concept code, to Microsoft a couple of months before Code Red appeared. They disclosed the vulnerability, but NOT the example exploit code, to the public.
Why wasn't the fix for the Code Red vulnerability released BEFORE the attack?? Why are the simpering sycophants of the tech media fawning all over Microsoft for getting a fix out so quickly?? The REAL question is "How long did Microsoft have a patch ready before it was released?" Hmmmmm?? (to quote Count Hasimir Fenring)
The water-supply system in Houston, Texas is controlled by boxen running Windows 98, no less, as are the administrative systems of the police and fire departments (mostly Win2k), etc. ad nauseum. All 19 departments of the city government are Microsoft-only shops, with the exception of one Linux webserver and a couple of HP mainframes.
In addition, many major hospitals use Wondows almost exclusively, although I must admit that most computer controlled medical instruments use their own purpose-built OS.
Don't ever believe that stuff about "all an OS crash gets you is a BSOD." Lots of computers are in places where a system failure could be life-threatening... and more than a few of them run Windows.
Now. let's talk about the financial services industry...
Two years ago when I was working for an ISP, I had every new user who called in for setup help (damn near all of them) configure Outlook/Outlook Express this way.
I mean, jeez... Just how the hell do people think Melissa, Anna Kournikova, Love Letter, sircam and the e-mail attack in nimda work???
Although I have adminned systems for about 15 years, I never had a job with a "systems *" title until April of this year...
As for my educational background, my first degree was Biology, followed by Engineering. I've done some graduate work in Business and gotten a J.D.
I think the thing that attracted my current employer's attention is the degree to which I have been exposed to mixed-platform networking. What got me the job was brainbench certs in Windows, Unix and Linux administration coupled with nearly 5 years experience on Linux. That being said, almost all of my times is spent on Solaris, Tru64 and a little Irix.
Oh, and I'm 51, so don't let anybody sell you that crock of bull about "too old to start an IT career."
Don't get me wrong... I admire Richard and his determination to attain free software's rightful position in the world... but...
Sun paid something like $80MM to acquire Star Division and then, almost immediately, turned the codebase over to the newly-chartered Open Office project. Still, Star Office isn't "purely free" enough to be RMS-approvable? Give me a break!
Hint... Richard, grow up... Sun, HP and IBM are pouring HUGE resources into free software... if you were a wee bit less political, they might pour a few resources into the FSF
This type of initiative is what will lead to the eventual commercialization of space.
Let's face it, it *shouldn't* cost half a billion bucks to build something that will survive in low earth orbit. Inside the magnetopause the hazard to electronics just isn't that huge.
As registrar for the new TLD Neulevel will undoubtedly make a TON of money as companies with significantly valuable trademarks rush to protect the value of their IP by registering all possible.your_TLD_here preceded by their trademark.
Or am I just a cynic?
I don't know lxr, but ...
on
Java IDEs?
·
· Score: 1
Xemacs, DDD and CVSWeb is a killer combination. That's what I use for all my (academic, I admit) coding needs.
Well, since nobody mentioned anything about the platform the questioner is working on, I'm gonna suggest Forte for Java - Community Edition from Sun. It's a free download.
No Sun box? Solaris 8 - x86 is also a free DL. (Hope you have a fat pipe if you go that route, it totals about a gig of zipped isos)
I don't know about others' reasons, but I have separate/tmp and/var partitions to prevent a compiler crash from corrupting my / filesystem. I have separate/home and/usr/local partitions so I don't have to reinstall all the non-distro stuff I've added to my system if I reinstall the OS or install a newer version.
Coder's type/spell well because a compiler is totally anal about spelling. If you want to see how well a coder REALLY types/spells, look at the comments ans CVS log, not the code.
Slashdot Mirror
Given that, why would anyone ever switch to Linux or other free M$ alternatives? You are saying that such a person would have no reasonable expactation (sic) of safety, and even if they were assured it was safe, their is no-one to hold accountable should that not be true.
...
<RANT>
The fact of the matter is that Linux and all the usual tools (both GPL and BSD licensed) have ironclad disclaimers of liability in their licenses. I consider having to accept those disclaimers in order to use the software at little, or no, cost to be a pretty fair deal.
Microsoft has even more stringent and detailed disclaimers in the licenses they apply to Windows, Office, Money and all the other software they sell, yet they expect me to give up a large and growing amount of both my money and my freedom to do what I wish with my computer in order to use their products.
Trying to avoid creating flamage, I'll leave the discussion of the relative technical merits of the two products, but I WOULD like to ask
Which deal to you think is more fair, 1) no money/no guarantee, 2) or lots of money/no guarantee?
Microsoft and all the other shrink-wrapped software houses have created a situation where they can charge what they want for their product while they remain immune from any liability for damage that their product might cause (How much do you think the wasted bandwidth burned by Code Red/nimda cost? My guess is in the billions.). Hell, they don't even guarantee it will run at all.
The proprietary software houses are making the railroad robber barons look like a bunch of kindergartners.
</RANT>
In a primarily Windows desktop environment that may be true ... In a primarily Unix desktop environment like I work in, Windows is the one with the interoperability problem.
Maybe due to all the recent flaws in the kernel ...
...
... and the mass migration from Unix to Windows 2000/XP ...
... the developers are realizing that windows is a better operating system.
... errrmmm ... UNIX!
Okay, I'll grant you there was a problem with 2.4.11 and a NASTY bug in 2.4.15, but at least Linus publicizes its bugs and gets a fix out as quickly as possible, as opposed to your favorite monopoly OS company which is trying its best to hide them
Say WHAT? I don't know the source of your information, but I've got news for you. The only mass migration to Win2K I've seen is from Win9x/Me/NT. As for XP, I don't know of a single case of anyone voluntarily switching to it.
Maybe this is the reason why all the computer science courses at the university I work at are taught under
Well, if you're going to participate in the debate, you have to attack the points made under the definition given for those terms, or you have to attack the definitions themself.
RMS's logic can be attacked within the framework of defined terms that he, himself, has espoused. Any experienced debater will tell you that this is absolutely THE most effective attack.
I disagree with your interpretation of Tim's "0"
... I OWN that code lock, stock and main() ... nobody else has a copy of it or even any idea about the functionality I've created ... it is ALL mine ... now I have a decision to make ...
... in which case, it will never realize it's potential as a "killer app", I can sell it, or I can give it away (in truth there exist more than just that one shade of gray (sell it) in between the black (keep it to myself) and the white (give it away), but for the argument, we're simplifying)
... Stahlman says it's HIS right to tell me what to do ... not only is it morally wrong for me to sell this product of my imagination, it is morally wrong for me to keep it to myself!
... IIRC, it only began with the rise of the OSI and ESR's ascendancy (and challenge to RMS's primacy) as an OSS/FS spokesman. For my money (as both a user and a developer), I'd rather have Eric guarding my freedom than Richard. The way the debate has developed, Eric would allow me, as a user, to choose between the alternatives, Stahlman acts as if there IS no alternative. As a developer, Eric would let me license my software any way I wished. Richard says I use GPL or I act immorally. From one who falls on both sides of the equation, I find that MY freedom is maximized by ESR's point of view, and, ignoring my puny development efforts, as a consumer of software, I find that my own freedom is again maximized under the Raymond/O'Reilly plan.
When I first read his piece a couple of weeks back, it was my understanding that Freedom 0 (in the software context) was the base freedom upon which everything else would be built.
This interpretation stems from the following chain of logic:
I right a piece of code that becomes (in my mind) the next "killer app"
I can keep it to myself
Now, who has the right to decide what I do?
O'Reilly and ESR say the decision is mine (I tend to agree)
This debate over a developer's right to choose is a rather recent development
Give it up Richard. Your grab for power over developers will never work. I am a Free/Open Source Software advocate, but your rhetoric is no longer convincing, even to me. The question is not "Whose freedom do we maximize?" it is "How is freedom maximized?" The answer is obvious.
Ahem ... yes ... interesting point.
As I recall, one of the celebrated victories of the FSF was when they took on Steve Jobs for expropriating a major portion of the gcc code tree to build Objective C for the Next Cube.
Ask Steve about the financial disparity between Stahlman and the corps.
Won't this just encourage corporations to sue over copyright infringement even more?
... "look and feel" issues are generally dealt with in a body of law more closely akin to trademark law than copyright.
... what would bar these people from doing the same?
... Apple was losing. That's why they settled with Microsoft on VERY generous (to Microsoft) terms.
No. First, the WTO isn't a corporation, it's an association of governments, therefore, it is arguable that they can't even own copyrights except in the capacity of a trustee for their citizens.
Second, there has to be copyrighted material on the site to the extent that it falls outside the "fair-use" doctrine, which, in the case of parody, is a broad sword, indeed. I haven't heard any news about Microsoft getting ready to sue the owner of www.fuckmicrosoft.com, even though the graphics on the site are damn near a direct knockoff of microsoft.com
Third, don't confuse "look and feel" with copyright
Three words
But with out full disclosure, a vunerability becomes something that can be put off till later.
... IIRC, this is EXACTLY what happened.
Errrrmmmm
For all the vitriol that has been slung on eEye for their alleged contribution to the Code Red/nimda plague, they reported the holes they found in IIS 5, with proof-of-concept code , to Microsoft a couple of months before Code Red appeared. They disclosed the vulnerability, but NOT the example exploit code, to the public.
Why wasn't the fix for the Code Red vulnerability released BEFORE the attack?? Why are the simpering sycophants of the tech media fawning all over Microsoft for getting a fix out so quickly?? The REAL question is "How long did Microsoft have a patch ready before it was released?" Hmmmmm?? (to quote Count Hasimir Fenring)
what better way to describe the "script kiddy" problem.
Another place the silver was used was in bus bars feeding electrolytic cells in aluminum refineries in Arkansas.
Like the nuclear refineries in Utah, the aluminum companies gave it all back.
The water-supply system in Houston, Texas is controlled by boxen running Windows 98, no less, as are the administrative systems of the police and fire departments (mostly Win2k), etc. ad nauseum. All 19 departments of the city government are Microsoft-only shops, with the exception of one Linux webserver and a couple of HP mainframes.
... and more than a few of them run Windows.
...
In addition, many major hospitals use Wondows almost exclusively, although I must admit that most computer controlled medical instruments use their own purpose-built OS.
Don't ever believe that stuff about "all an OS crash gets you is a BSOD." Lots of computers are in places where a system failure could be life-threatening
Now. let's talk about the financial services industry
Microsoft is _JUST_NOW_ owning up to this hole???
... Just how the hell do people think Melissa, Anna Kournikova, Love Letter, sircam and the e-mail attack in nimda work???
Two years ago when I was working for an ISP, I had every new user who called in for setup help (damn near all of them) configure Outlook/Outlook Express this way.
I mean, jeez
Every commercial Unix I've seen on the job (Solaris, Tru64, Irix, HP-UX) comes with bash either pre-installed or on a "freeware CD".
You someone does. The network I admin uses NIS.
Although I have adminned systems for about 15 years, I never had a job with a "systems *" title until April of this year ...
As for my educational background, my first degree was Biology, followed by Engineering. I've done some graduate work in Business and gotten a J.D.
I think the thing that attracted my current employer's attention is the degree to which I have been exposed to mixed-platform networking. What got me the job was brainbench certs in Windows, Unix and Linux administration coupled with nearly 5 years experience on Linux. That being said, almost all of my times is spent on Solaris, Tru64 and a little Irix.
Oh, and I'm 51, so don't let anybody sell you that crock of bull about "too old to start an IT career."
Don't get me wrong ... I admire Richard and his determination to attain free software's rightful position in the world ... but ...
... Richard, grow up ... Sun, HP and IBM are pouring HUGE resources into free software ... if you were a wee bit less political, they might pour a few resources into the FSF
Sun paid something like $80MM to acquire Star Division and then, almost immediately, turned the codebase over to the newly-chartered Open Office project. Still, Star Office isn't "purely free" enough to be RMS-approvable? Give me a break!
Hint
Besides, WTF made you the King of Open Platforms?
This type of initiative is what will lead to the eventual commercialization of space.
Let's face it, it *shouldn't* cost half a billion bucks to build something that will survive in low earth orbit. Inside the magnetopause the hazard to electronics just isn't that huge.
As registrar for the new TLD Neulevel will undoubtedly make a TON of money as companies with significantly valuable trademarks rush to protect the value of their IP by registering all possible .your_TLD_here preceded by their trademark.
Or am I just a cynic?
Xemacs, DDD and CVSWeb is a killer combination. That's what I use for all my (academic, I admit) coding needs.
Real men use sed from memory. ;-)
Well, since nobody mentioned anything about the platform the questioner is working on, I'm gonna suggest Forte for Java - Community Edition from Sun. It's a free download.
No Sun box? Solaris 8 - x86 is also a free DL. (Hope you have a fat pipe if you go that route, it totals about a gig of zipped isos)
A Winblows user ...
I don't know about others' reasons, but I have separate /tmp and /var partitions to prevent a compiler crash from corrupting my / filesystem. I have separate /home and /usr/local partitions so I don't have to reinstall all the non-distro stuff I've added to my system if I reinstall the OS or install a newer version.
Coder's type/spell well because a compiler is totally anal about spelling. If you want to see how well a coder REALLY types/spells, look at the comments ans CVS log, not the code.
Yeah, I couldn't get in ... so I guess that shows the power of /.