Plenty of people are asking why we want to fork lift X out for something completely different.
And how many of them are current X.org developers? Because most of the Wayland developers are long time X.org and previously FreeX86 developers.
Lots of people are arguing the handful of real and actual problems that do exist with X can by solved by adding (some of which has already happened) a few more extensions and that if you don't care about the old X protocol stuff well don't use its mostly harmless to you just sitting there.
Then those "lots of people" should put up or shut up. On the other hand, the people who actually have been trying to do that with X.org for nearly a decade say its horrendous and thus that's why they're working on Wayland.
There's no "lock-in" to systemd either. If you don't like systemd switch to one of the plenty of distros without it or create your own rather than simply whining.
And the site seems to work perfectly fine even with blocking the Javascript. Seems those scripts they want people to run are of no real purpose beyond tracking and ads.
It's a far better deal than CBO estimate that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars will have cost us ~$2.5 trillion by 2017. $60 billion is a drop in the bucket in comparison.
Umm, no. The heavy users will pay the extra $20 and keep being heavy users since there is nowhere else they can go for the same price service
You just contradicted yourself. The whole reason why Verizon is trying to get people off of their grandfathered plans is because the heavy data usage costs Verizon more money. If being a heavy data user was more profitable for Verizon they would have never gotten rid of the unlimited plans to begin with.
A happy long term customer is worth a LOT more than a new signed customer.
Only if the long-term customer isn't one that costs more to support than a new user. And Verizon has already stated that these data-heavy users are more costly.
If any of that were true they wouldn't be raising the costs of the plan where the goal is to get them off of it. Their metered plans are far, far more profitable.
They've lost a customer and whatever their monthly profit was on that customer, plus they'll have to spend money trying to get that customer back (which may not succeed).
Or they'll just get other subscribers to join that will start out on a higher-margin plan and thus Verizon wins. Why would they spend money to get a lower-profit customer over simply getting new customers that they'll extract more profit from?
But he's not. The unlimited plan isn't that profitable. That's why Verizon is trying to purposefully push people out of that contract by increasing the cost.
Except that these customers are far more expensive to support than the people on higher margin plans. So likely they'll offset the revenue loss with more profit do to fatter margins.
The thing that Verizon doesn't realize is that the type of people that hung onto this plan for 3 years are not the type of people that will stay with Verizon if they get off of unlimited, its the type of people that hang out on slick deals.
And they are a microscopic minority of Verizon's 135 million subscribers. Verizon likely won't bat an eye if they leave.
Exactly. Verizon would likely prefer losing these customers rather than trying to appease them. The whole point of this action and all the previous ones is to get people to cancel their contract.
Only an immensely tiny minority of their current customers can still have these grandfathered plans. Even if all of those users left, Verizon would still have more than 130 million subscribers.
Slashdot Mirror
X was built with a client/server architecture paradigm.
So is Wayland.
Thanks to people whining about it, weyland/weston now has RDP support
No, it was already going to include RDP support anyway.
However the main difference between Wayland and systemd is that systemd does a lot more than the thing it replaces,
Only because people falsely claim that systemd is just meant to be an alternate init system.
Obviously that should be *XFree86*.
Plenty of people are asking why we want to fork lift X out for something completely different.
And how many of them are current X.org developers? Because most of the Wayland developers are long time X.org and previously FreeX86 developers.
Lots of people are arguing the handful of real and actual problems that do exist with X can by solved by adding (some of which has already happened) a few more extensions and that if you don't care about the old X protocol stuff well don't use its mostly harmless to you just sitting there.
Then those "lots of people" should put up or shut up. On the other hand, the people who actually have been trying to do that with X.org for nearly a decade say its horrendous and thus that's why they're working on Wayland.
Oh no. Are you gonna go slice your wrists and cry some more?
There's no "lock-in" to systemd either. If you don't like systemd switch to one of the plenty of distros without it or create your own rather than simply whining.
And the site seems to work perfectly fine even with blocking the Javascript. Seems those scripts they want people to run are of no real purpose beyond tracking and ads.
It's a far better deal than CBO estimate that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars will have cost us ~$2.5 trillion by 2017. $60 billion is a drop in the bucket in comparison.
Umm, no. The heavy users will pay the extra $20 and keep being heavy users since there is nowhere else they can go for the same price service
You just contradicted yourself. The whole reason why Verizon is trying to get people off of their grandfathered plans is because the heavy data usage costs Verizon more money. If being a heavy data user was more profitable for Verizon they would have never gotten rid of the unlimited plans to begin with.
A happy long term customer is worth a LOT more than a new signed customer.
Only if the long-term customer isn't one that costs more to support than a new user. And Verizon has already stated that these data-heavy users are more costly.
He is extremely profitable, moreso than under a fixed plan.
He might bring in *more revenue*, but that doesn't mean that the user is *more profitable* for Verizon.
If any of that were true they wouldn't be raising the costs of the plan where the goal is to get them off of it. Their metered plans are far, far more profitable.
They've lost a customer and whatever their monthly profit was on that customer, plus they'll have to spend money trying to get that customer back (which may not succeed).
Or they'll just get other subscribers to join that will start out on a higher-margin plan and thus Verizon wins. Why would they spend money to get a lower-profit customer over simply getting new customers that they'll extract more profit from?
But he's not. The unlimited plan isn't that profitable. That's why Verizon is trying to purposefully push people out of that contract by increasing the cost.
Exactly. Less people on low-margin plans means that any revenue loss is more than offset by the ass-rape margins on their other plans.
Not really. People at Microsoft Research showed it to be broken years before it became a scandal. No one bothered to listen.
Except that these customers are far more expensive to support than the people on higher margin plans. So likely they'll offset the revenue loss with more profit do to fatter margins.
And the Supreme Court has upheld the forced arbitration clause which gives them even more leverage to fuck people over.
Sure, that is the whole point. They are purposefully making the terms onerous to get peope to cancel their contract.
You can try to sue that the clause is illegal to invalidate the contract but you're facing very little success of winning that.
The thing that Verizon doesn't realize is that the type of people that hung onto this plan for 3 years are not the type of people that will stay with Verizon if they get off of unlimited, its the type of people that hang out on slick deals.
And they are a microscopic minority of Verizon's 135 million subscribers. Verizon likely won't bat an eye if they leave.
It never applied even for customers on a contract. GP apparently never read the contract they signed with Verizon.
People have been attacking SHA-1 since 2005.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
No need for any conspiracy since people were warned about potential weaknesses in SHA-1 for a decade.
Exactly. Verizon would likely prefer losing these customers rather than trying to appease them. The whole point of this action and all the previous ones is to get people to cancel their contract.
Only an immensely tiny minority of their current customers can still have these grandfathered plans. Even if all of those users left, Verizon would still have more than 130 million subscribers.