>Seriously though, why should we be feeling sorry >for these people? So they didn't bother to >document how many licenses they have and how >many desktops they have running which >software.... how exactly is that some sort of >Microsoft problem?
This isn't about keeping track of licences, this is about microsoft squeezeing large companies all they are worth for licenseing costs. This is microsofts problem, wether they realize it or not, because of the fact that people will realize a say, "hey wait, I could run the exact same setup for 90% the cost, including the salerys of high level sysadmins.
>It would appear that CmdrTaco is attempting to >scare people by giving the impression that >Microsoft runs around with a club trying to beat
>people over the head for more money (that may or >may not be the case.)
This IS the case, read the article.
>First of all, there is no MS Access equivalent.
There is if you know what your doing. Eg, postgresql, mysql, oracle, sybase, etc. backend with whatever frontend you plan on writing/using
>That would mean we'd have to switch over all>br>>these little programs that have maybe 10 users to >another system. There really isn't any RAD >programming system for Linux (Klyx ain't there >yet.), so that means a lot of time and effort for
>something pretty small.
Its Kylix btw. and RAD, lets see, you seem to have left out a few:
perl, python, tcl, php, I can go on and on.
>When you compare all that to the cost of Windows >2000 (less than $10,000 for 7 copies of server >and 1000 user CALs under our select
>contract), and it really doesn't make sense to >switch.
You pay $10,000 for licences of microsoft products, and pay people $60,000 a year to run and maintain thease systems, where as you go with the unix/linux method, you pay almost $0 for the licences, assumeing your not using oracle or something to that effect, and then you pay people $60,000 a year to run/maintain the systems. Which is cheaper? You take the guess.
Is it just me, or are there a little too many people discussing why this linux distro should or should not be allowed to be sold for download. Other people have mentioned the licenceing issues, so I won't bother going into that. There are a million and one linux distros out there, so whats the big deal if a few of them charge a few bucks.
The good ones will still remain free (I won't mention them, because of the all so reoccuring distro wars). And it bothers me, as so many other distro's do the same, on the libranet screenshots page, they have just a bunch of screens of gnome and E. Whats so special about this particular distro that would bother people that they started chargeing people to download it. Eg: redhat has the user friendly gui installer in 7.0 along with other releases, something that that company developed on their own that makes that product special. Libranet claims to have a simple installer, but do they show it? no. To me its just ADBD (another debian based distro)
you can already make your own tld's its just that no one without using your dns server can access them. Such as my local network here. I have a dns server providing the tld.home i can send mail to someperson@home or someperson@bob.home
Creating tld's is not the problem getting the rest of the world to be able to use them is
I had a cell phone for my previous job. If I used it for any more then 3 minutes or so, my ear would get somewhat warm, even if the phone was not in direct contact with it. This has to tell you that something is happening to your body thats not normal, and probebly not good for it. The reason people are attacking cell phones is they most likely cause harm.
I worked for a small isp in NYC, and did 100% of their system administration on several linux, bsd, sun, and winNT boxes. I was replaceing their previous sysadmin, because he was leaving for another job, and I also got zero training about their system specifics from him, which was annoying. I worked there for about 10 months, we were getting extremely busy, and the office was empty most of the time because the entire staff was out on client calls, so my boss decided to hire an assistant sysdamin, to handle server issues and etc when I was possibly out on a call, vacation, sick, etc. Which makes sence.
Anyway, one day I recieved an EMAIL saying that they no longer need my service there, and thanks for working and blah blah blah. When I was busy training the assistant sysadmin about out system specific stuff, I got friendly with him. I found out after I was "let go", that he now had my position,(they were also paying him less, because he had less of a skillset, among other things) and felt he really bad. So, he found another job somewhere else, that was paying about 30% more, and now since he left, they hired a new sysadmin to replace him, which knew even less then my ex-assistant, and every once and a while for a month or so afterwards. I would get a phone call, or email asking about their system. So, well, their just out of luck.
Beta test IE6 eh? Last time I heard of someone beta testing a Microsoft product it was my old boss testing 5.5, He did not happen to like it, and decided to uninstall it. Wham, there goes his windows instalation, right down the tubes. I wonder if IE6 will do the same. By the way, it seems that every single release of IE there has been a way to execute evil code on a page loaded without the users consent. This is more of a fault of activex then IE, but the sad part is, activex is a part of IE, and Microsoft refuses to revamp activex to limit the possibility of nasty code being ran on some poor guys computer. This isn't a Microsoft bashing post, this isn't an IE bashing post, its actually a little of both...:)
People might think IE is a better browser, people might think netscape is a better browser. The problem is: Microsoft is dealing the cards here, and it's a stacked deck, MS decides to implement some new nifty "javascript" or whatever, features to add eyecandy to web pages, this is the problem, Microsoft made it, and supports it, meanwhile every other browser ever made dosn't support it and therefore is "inferior", and has to go and play catch-up. When are we going to stop following one companies lead and start some kind of real standard here. And really in the end-all stop the browser wars.
My dad has always liked that quote. As for me, I hope somewhere out there or some groups of people out there would be nice enough to put in the time and effort to make an all-in-one "im" client and possibly have ports to most of the popular os's
Slashdot Mirror
>Seriously though, why should we be feeling sorry
>for these people? So they didn't bother to
>document how many licenses they have and how
>many desktops they have running which
>software.... how exactly is that some sort of
>Microsoft problem?
This isn't about keeping track of licences, this is about microsoft squeezeing large companies all they are worth for licenseing costs. This is microsofts problem, wether they realize it or not, because of the fact that people will realize a say, "hey wait, I could run the exact same setup for 90% the cost, including the salerys of high level sysadmins.
>It would appear that CmdrTaco is attempting to
>scare people by giving the impression that
>Microsoft runs around with a club trying to beat
>people over the head for more money (that may or
>may not be the case.)
This IS the case, read the article.
>First of all, there is no MS Access equivalent.
There is if you know what your doing. Eg, postgresql, mysql, oracle, sybase, etc. backend with whatever frontend you plan on writing/using
>That would mean we'd have to switch over all>br>>these little programs that have maybe 10 users to
>another system. There really isn't any RAD
>programming system for Linux (Klyx ain't there
>yet.), so that means a lot of time and effort for
>something pretty small.
Its Kylix btw. and RAD, lets see, you seem to have left out a few: perl, python, tcl, php, I can go on and on.
>When you compare all that to the cost of Windows
>2000 (less than $10,000 for 7 copies of server
>and 1000 user CALs under our select
>contract), and it really doesn't make sense to
>switch.
You pay $10,000 for licences of microsoft products, and pay people $60,000 a year to run and maintain thease systems, where as you go with the unix/linux method, you pay almost $0 for the licences, assumeing your not using oracle or something to that effect, and then you pay people $60,000 a year to run/maintain the systems. Which is cheaper? You take the guess.
Is it just me, or are there a little too many people discussing why this linux distro should or should not be allowed to be sold for download. Other people have mentioned the licenceing issues, so I won't bother going into that. There are a million and one linux distros out there, so whats the big deal if a few of them charge a few bucks.
The good ones will still remain free (I won't mention them, because of the all so reoccuring distro wars). And it bothers me, as so many other distro's do the same, on the libranet screenshots page, they have just a bunch of screens of gnome and E. Whats so special about this particular distro that would bother people that they started chargeing people to download it. Eg: redhat has the user friendly gui installer in 7.0 along with other releases, something that that company developed on their own that makes that product special. Libranet claims to have a simple installer, but do they show it? no. To me its just ADBD (another debian based distro)
you can already make your own tld's its just that no one without using your dns server can access them. Such as my local network here. I have a dns server providing the tld .home i can send mail to someperson@home or someperson@bob.home
Creating tld's is not the problem getting the rest of the world to be able to use them is
what about name based virtual hosts...
Hate to tell you, but this is the news bud
As I said, even if the phone is not in contact with my ear.
I had a cell phone for my previous job. If I used it for any more then 3 minutes or so, my ear would get somewhat warm, even if the phone was not in direct contact with it. This has to tell you that something is happening to your body thats not normal, and probebly not good for it. The reason people are attacking cell phones is they most likely cause harm.
I worked for a small isp in NYC, and did 100% of their system administration on several linux, bsd, sun, and winNT boxes. I was replaceing their previous sysadmin, because he was leaving for another job, and I also got zero training about their system specifics from him, which was annoying. I worked there for about 10 months, we were getting extremely busy, and the office was empty most of the time because the entire staff was out on client calls, so my boss decided to hire an assistant sysdamin, to handle server issues and etc when I was possibly out on a call, vacation, sick, etc. Which makes sence.
Anyway, one day I recieved an EMAIL saying that they no longer need my service there, and thanks for working and blah blah blah. When I was busy training the assistant sysadmin about out system specific stuff, I got friendly with him. I found out after I was "let go", that he now had my position,(they were also paying him less, because he had less of a skillset, among other things) and felt he really bad. So, he found another job somewhere else, that was paying about 30% more, and now since he left, they hired a new sysadmin to replace him, which knew even less then my ex-assistant, and every once and a while for a month or so afterwards. I would get a phone call, or email asking about their system. So, well, their just out of luck.
Beta test IE6 eh? Last time I heard of someone beta testing a Microsoft product it was my old boss testing 5.5, He did not happen to like it, and decided to uninstall it. Wham, there goes his windows instalation, right down the tubes. I wonder if IE6 will do the same. By the way, it seems that every single release of IE there has been a way to execute evil code on a page loaded without the users consent. This is more of a fault of activex then IE, but the sad part is, activex is a part of IE, and Microsoft refuses to revamp activex to limit the possibility of nasty code being ran on some poor guys computer. This isn't a Microsoft bashing post, this isn't an IE bashing post, its actually a little of both... :)
People might think IE is a better browser, people might think netscape is a better browser. The problem is: Microsoft is dealing the cards here, and it's a stacked deck, MS decides to implement some new nifty "javascript" or whatever, features to add eyecandy to web pages, this is the problem, Microsoft made it, and supports it, meanwhile every other browser ever made dosn't support it and therefore is "inferior", and has to go and play catch-up. When are we going to stop following one companies lead and start some kind of real standard here. And really in the end-all stop the browser wars.
Never mind...dont yell at me...when i reloaded the page to see my post i noticed that a mirror got posted....la la la...
My dad has always liked that quote. As for me, I hope somewhere out there or some groups of people out there would be nice enough to put in the time and effort to make an all-in-one "im" client and possibly have ports to most of the popular os's