I can see your point. And yes. It would be great if there was a big incentive for hardware makers to open their drivers right now. They could be incorporated into the kernel and Linux would really work "out of the box" in a way that someone's grandmother could just pop the disk in and only have to type in a user name and password for everything to be automatically set up. True plug and play. With the right hardware we are nearly there, but getting a bit more would complete it.
There are two ways of going about getting what we want.
1) The vinegar method. "WE DEMAND OPEN DRIVERS RIGHT NOW FOR ALL YOUR HARDWARE. WE DON'T CARE THAT YOU ARE JUST AS INCONVINENCED BY THIS AS WE ARE, AND WE DON'T CARE THAT YOU CAN'T IN MANY CASES OPEN THE PATENTED PRINCIPLES THAT YOU ARE GRANTED BY A THIRD PARTY" (pause to wipe saliva from mouth)
Stick to your principles rigidly and shun any binary blobs that pollute the free open source principle dogmatically. The hardware manufacturers will soon be falling over themselves to court the wallets of the tiny picky minority of Linux users... not! Ogg is more efficient than MP3, but which one does the PMP industry use? although it is slowly getting better.
Result:- Nobody outside the small uber geek community that would put up with the pain of having to carefully research every single bit of hardware, and then spend forever trying to reverse engineer it gives a damn. Forget Linux having a wider audience. Mister open source evangelist.. meet mister door.
2) The honey method. Get a visible presence in the market to the point where the hardware companies are actively producing drivers for Linux as a matter of course so they can sell to a significant market. Get behind the open driver project one of the kernel guys has set up where they write Linux drivers to be included in the kernel under NDA if required, but as source instead of binary blobs. They offer this as a free service to the hardware industry, and a few have already taken advantage of it. There was a time when companies charged for manuals and drivers. Now everything comes on a disk, and can be downloaded for free.
Sell the idea to the hardware guys as a way of reducing their driver creation overheads. They can have the code written for nothing, and the community then maintains the drivers, while still keeping their trade secrets.
Result:-Win win. Everybody happy. Companies become Linux partners instead of being Microsoft minions, and both systems get drivers.
The flaw with Open source purity is that you can only demand that the industry does something if you are big enough to hurt their market if they don't cooperate. Currently, Linux is a gnat attacking an elephant. But it doesn't always have to be that way.
Dell have already said that they will show preference to open source drivers in their Linux hardware choices, and it is easier to make a distro and track problems with open drivers, and if a driver is already in the distro, no set up is needed. So who apart from the hardware makers is benefiting from there being closed drivers in the long term? And even that is not clear, as they benefit from having better drivers and the appearance of being more reliable.
As far as Shuttleworth keeping faith with the Linux community, remember that he doesn't actually own Linux, and as we have seen, the FSF is quite capable of making things awkward for those who like to take without giving back, or any of a multitude of Linux components could break Ubuntu in nothing flat. He may have the most popular ease of use distro at the moment, but there are many waiting in the wings to take over should he do something daft.
It will take time, and it could all go very wrong, but it could also go very right. We will just have to wait and see.
well, yeah... he can... but except playing most modern games on it. so yeah... don't blow that balloon too much. Your post just shows how incompetent you are. My Vista 64bit running on 2GB RAM is working JUST FINE.
I wonder when the FUD ever stops, I mean/.ers are supposed to be tech lovers but it seems that all they have is FUD and hate.
Linux might be great and all, but nothing will be successful if it's built on spite....Now spice on the other hand, expands your conscienceness. (Only a true sci-fi fan will get me.) Thing is.. There are too many stories just like this kicking around just about any forum to ignore. Microsoft always seem to release software that is beyond the ability of most of the hardware at the time of release. They did it with their PDA stuff, they did it with XP I would imagine, and they definitly did it with Vista.
Those who have had good experiences are either lucky that the combination of hardware they have is better supported and powerful enough, or they specifically combed forums and articles for any pitfalls they can avoid. If I was recommending an OS to anybody for a computer they were buying right now, I'd go for Linux or XP every time depending on the needs of the user. Vista.. no way. There are just too many gotchas right now. In a year or two when the hardware support is there and there are apps that will actually take advantage of Vista, then it would make sense, but for now, its too much pain when things go wrong.
A computer capable or running Vista is going to be close enough to a gamer's PC of a year or two ago from what I've read, while Linux or XP can run happily on a half gig of memory and a modest cheap processor. Not everyone is a gamer, and those that are, are not always going to go for the latest graphics intensive frag fest that needs the latest video card and an insane amount of power. For an enthusiast, this isn't a problem, but for someone looking for a general purpose PC, its overkill.
Slashdotters are tech lovers, but some of us are also realists. Computers are used for more than the latest games. Some people find a system that works reliably and is easy to fix when it does go wrong preferable to spending a significant amount of money on features that are not important to them. Spending $400 on a hot video card is pointless if the most demanding thing you do is a little photo retouching. And non slashdotters are often not interested in the tech, just getting the apps they have paid good money for continuing to work, and to be able to get their work done like they did before.
Well.. except for the little fact that Dell and the other big multinationals tend to buy in incredible bulk, so get better prices than even the normal wholesale price for components. So they still have an edge. A small vendor may sell a few dozen PCs a month, but the Dells of the world sell thousands. Dell can also go direct to the manufacturer instead of giving a wholesaler a cut.
I doubt Dell is scared at all.
The local guy is not going to have a big well advertised brand which the customer is going to want. I've seen so many people go to a chain store and buy the own brand garbage or big brand systems again and again. If they are very lucky they get a good one and it stays working. If not, they just go back again and get another because the salesman tells them this is the best deal.
While the little guy could go out of business next week, a big company is perceived to be more stable. To most users, there are no upgrade options once it leaves the shop, so the idea that someone else could fix it is not even considered, and customised parts or cases emphasise the point.
And the final advantage is the bundle deal. The big guys can sweeten the deal with a cheap digital camera, a scanner/printer/fax, a bunch of "free" apps etc. The little guy will usually only pre install what the customer specifies and charges for each one. Even though the latter deal is better, the big name deal looks better.
Dell have a big market. The people who just want a computer and think one is as good as another. This doesn't really cross over to the people who want more input into what they are buying. Both can exist in parallel.
Even with Linux instead of Windows, they will still have a niche. Its like the stereo market. Some will happily buy an all in one system with cheap plastic speakers and bell wire connections, others will go for a more upmarket all in one, others will go for separates of the same brand, and still others will carefully pour over reviews and talk on forums so they can get the best match of components they can afford. All markets earn enough to provide the competition and the diversity that keep these markets in existence.
Which is what the WGA is for. Installing XP with a dodgy key is a doddle, and most of the pirate copies of Windows are the corporate one which doesn't need activation. But when it comes to foiling the WGA to get updates, then the fun starts. Even if someone finds a work around, there will be another version out that will neutralize the crack. Thus, Windows may be easy to pirate, but less easy to keep pirated. And no doubt, Vista is a step up in the game.
To make this emerging market friendly, you just have to ignore a few of the cracks if the person signing up to the update site is from there, or make the WGA process a little less effective for now based on the location of the user.
Okay, so you would go to a nut house and solicit opinions if you were evaluating psychiatric treatments. Thanks for the tangetn, that adds nothing to the conversation. Would you ask them about politics or technology? Would you travel the world trying to hit every loony bin you could find, so as not to miss out on any possible opinion that might challenge your own? Or would asking them be among the last you would seek opinions from? If one of them says a giant chicken is coming to destroy us all, do you sit down and listen to him tell you all about it? Maybe you just have a lot more time on your hands than I. And strangely enough, I would listen to an economist talking about broadband penetration. I may or may not agree with them, but the points they make have a good chance of increasing my understanding of the topic from a different angle. In this case, I was surprised to learn how badly Americans are served by their broadband service. And fascinated to see the various excuses trotted out for a situation that is so bad from a user's point of view.
Over here in the UK, we have access to dozens of broadband suppliers, and a variety of speeds and prices. This was achieved by stopping the main telecom company(who own the physical lines)from overcharging and excluding competitors from offering a service. They are still allowed to compete, but they were forced to spin off the broadband provision aspect, and buy the connection aspect from themselves for the same price as the other broadband companies so they would not have an unfair advantage. State intervention can be done constructively, and when it is, it is a good deal for the consumer.
I never suggested that anybody should listen to every random person about any random topic. My point was that dismissing someone because of a political leaning is short sighted. Especially as the main point of the article was dealing with the financial aspect of the problem as much if not more than the political aspect. As is refusing to listen to anybody with a different view to your own.
For someone with so little time, you seem to be willing to spend quite a bit of it replying to this thread. Terribly sorry for wasting such a rare commodity.
Not sure I understand your logic. Evaluating all points of view is important in understanding any issue. If you only listen to those who share your views,
Yes, you indeed are not understanding. Do you spend time visiting mental institutions and listening to and evaluating what the inmates say, towards gathering all points of view, lest you don't get the chance to challenge your opinions in some important way? If I am evaluating ways to offer better treatment for psychiatric patients, then yes. As to listen to the staff alone would not give me the full picture. And not everyone who needs to stay in a mental institution is irrational.
If I'm deciding which ISP to use or which TV set to buy, then I find as many relevant articles as possible, and make up my mind by assessing the various view points. I may find half a dozen reviews on a given product that sing it's praises, but one that calls it a pile of crap. Do I assume that due to the majority view being positive, the one dissenter is wrong? Or do I investigate their dislike of the product in question to see if they have a valid point, and that the other reviews were written by people of limited knowledge of the topic or paid to advertise it, thus containing inaccurate information?
There are an infinite number of points of view. It would only be logical to evaluate everyone's opinion if you have infinite time to be alive and to do so. Barring that, it's only logical to prioritize. And within that, it's logical to place the opinions of people who are known to spew last in the order of evaluation. For an infinite number of topics, yes, there are theoretically an infinite number of views in total, but for any given subject, the number of views is decidedly finite. The article was dealing with a very specific topic, so the number of possible views is quite small. And the more specific the topic, the fewer possible relevant opinions apply, and of those, the number that stand up to scrutiny is even smaller.
If you take the time to comment on the topic, then you obviously have an interest in it, so spending time gathering information on the off chance that there is an aspect you have yet to consider is a good use of time. Then at least you will be able to challenge the conclusions in a rational way. Dismissing it out of hand is a waste of time.
I was only making the perfectly logical argument that because the messenger is non-credible the message should not be evaluated. Not sure I understand your logic. Evaluating all points of view is important in understanding any issue. If you only listen to those who share your views, then you never get the chance to challenge your own opinions. In this case, the author puts forward a perfectly valid point that unregulated free markets can be a bad thing for customers, while regulated free markets may mean less profit for the companies involved, it works out better for the customer. I would add that too much regulation can be as bad as too little for competition.
"He's saying that someone afraid of their computer can't do it. And until Linux can be used by people afraid of their computer, it won't appeal to the majority of the desktop PC market." The real question is should people who are afraid of their computers be using a computer in the first place? I've seen quite a few such people who are sat in front of a computer with no real training and told to get on with it. They are the ones who add up a column of spreadsheet figures with a calculator, and manage to save everything to the root of the c: drive.
Can't imagine why they're afraid of their computers? It's not like it raped them during childhood or anything. Big expensive scary job devouring scary thing sitting on the desk, and it beeps at them. They don't know what is going to break it or when it is going to eat all of their work. People are scared of what they don't understand, and feel stupid because they feel they should be able to do this just like everyone else.
So ignore the messenger and concentrate on the message. Does having broadband services carved up between a limited number of companies make for more competition than making th telecom and cable companies act only as carriers for the same services? And if they are the only ones who can make an economically viable business doing this, are they going to have any real incentive to improve the service and reduce the cost to end users? Its a perfectly valid question, and many will agree with the author's conclusion.
Agreed. I'm quite surprised that no one in this discussion seems to have made reference to Ubuntu's release schedule. Ubuntu's six-month release plan is tremendously successful in both providing users with cutting-edge features and motivating developers to improve the operating system. It seems Microsoft is realizing the flaws in its own development model and is trying to fix it. This is good; it means better software for everyone. The difference is.. The frequently updated Linux distros are free. Even the commercial ones tend to have you pay for the support instead of paying for the software on a license by license basis (and as far as I know, the corporate versions don't use the free distro release frequency). This does have a huge advantage over Microsoft in that the distro can evolve by carefully tweaking things depending on customer feedback, and adding and removing default packages as time goes by.
Windows releases don't always have to have groundbreaking changes, and we don't all have to upgrade to the latest and greatest Windows before the next one comes out. It's okay for them to release a new Windows every year for $300; we can just pick and choose to which versions we want to upgrade, and their user base can be evenly spread over several different versions. I disagree. Because Windows is sold on a per license basis, it has to have some hook to make people want to upgrade. So an incremental upgrade for Windows would not work unless they did something like selling the licenses and access to several updates. As it is, people are not too happy dealing with Windows updates. Imagine the annoyance if they had to do it every year. A change in driver model here, a disk access enhancement there, and soon you have a nightmare scenario where everyone is scuttling around to support the latest Windows, while dropping support for last year's version. Great for hardware makers, crap for the end users.
As to price, Microsoft makes it's money from pre installs and corporate licensing. Not retail sales, for which the price is already way too much when compared to the OEM versions.
It is a pretty good example though. German archaeologists and anthropologists took a long time to be taken seriously after that. Is it any different to someone doing research on Global warming, or trying to figure out just how much oil is left while having their research funded by the big oil companies? No matter how good the research either way, there is always going to be a stain of doubt over the accuracy of their findings.
I would much prefer that they get rid of these people off the street or stop the next building from exploding then them having a video of me walking down the road and catching me looking at some girls ass, or pissing on a building when I have been drinking. It affects me and the community more with crime and the whole country with acts of terrorist then it does being caught on a video (which will never be used, unless there happens to be a terrorist standing right next to me while I walk past.) Thank you for informing us of one count of stalking, and one count of indecent exposure. Unless the girl in question was under the age of sixteen, in which case we can add grooming to the list. As these are all seen a s precursor crimes, you will be delighted to know that you are now on our sex offender register.
Congratulations sir... You are the people we are trying to get off the street. Please present yourself at your nearest police station with a full confession to each of these crimes and any others not detailed above.
I agree. My mother (who just got 'an internet' at home) should be able to press 'go' and use a computer, with very little training. Why not? The vast majority of computer users do only very, very simple things on their computer.
This is exactly the problem. Would the same person expect to be able to play the violin just because they bought one?
The rank hypocracy of FOSSies never falls short of amazing.
They continue to whine and pule how being a FOSSie is all about choice, and how people should be free to choose... but when a company or organization chooses Microsoft, that's when we find out it's not really about choice, it's really about choosing what the FOSSies want you to. Nothing hypocritical here. We want the choice to use a public service, not the product of an individual company. What choice does providing this service as Windows only offer? Windows or nothing. Not exactly a free choice. Using Windows specific software to access the service reduces choice.
And as Microsoft have no real obligation to keep supporting older versions of their operating system with the DRM mechanism that this service uses, so a service that people will come to rely on will be forced into endless upgrades if they wish to keep using it. If the BBC insists on using Microsoft software to deliver the service, thats fine. So long as they provide the means for the service to be used with other platforms as they do now with the radio and TV programs they already stream from the BBC website.
As it stands. Only those with Windows will be able to use the proposed service, but with multi platform services, there is no suggestion of cutting windows users off. Thus choice is offered. Linux, Windows, OSX, some later to be designed set top box with an internet connection built in perhaps. Its all good.
Funny thing.. I upgraded my Linux box over the weekend. After the hardware was set up, I just switched on the computer and it worked perfectly. No drivers for the motherboard, no video card drivers, no sound card drivers etc. I have been in the same position with Windows and its easier to just install from scratch than to remove the old drivers and install the new ones. I'm not completely sure how Windows install images are made, but for a company with a variety of hardware permutations, wouldn't a single Linux image pre loaded onto the entire line of Linux computers less hassle?
Didn't Microsoft have to extend the cut off point for 98 by a year or two? No reason to think it will be any different for XP. If anything, I would imagine there are more XP systems around than 98. Some will go to Linux or OSX, some will grudgingly go to Vosta or whatever comes after, and some will keep running ol unpatched XP systems until the computer dies. Besides.. Who knows what the computer market will be like in 2012+
All two of them that Dell is selling (to the home user)? If they can't figure out the difference between the two versions of Vista, they don't have a chance in hell at figuring out how to use Ubuntu. Ahh.. so offering twice as many windows options as the single Linux option for home users is an advantage? Which is academic anyway, as most of the people who are going to buy the Dell computers are already Linux users or already know a bit about it and are more comfortable buying from a big name retailer than putting it together themselves.
And what exactly is so hard about using Ubuntu? From a geek point of view, its incredibly easy without reading a single line of instruction. For a complete noob, general operation is no different to Windows, and I would assume one of the reasons they chose Ubuntu was that it is exceptionally to set up with things like codecs and video card drivers. The wireless networking will already be auto detected, so another common problem out the window.
And if you think many computer illiterate users can't wreck a carefully set up and tuned Windows install in that space of time, you are obviously not dealing with the people I fix computers for. Even with a firewall and a virus scanner, they still manage to get full of all kinds of junk, so the only fast thing about their new computer is how quickly it gets owned.
Without any bias. Purely based on the fact that there isn't any of the huge amount of malware that runs on Windows, they would be better off with Ubuntu. But then I'd lose money:-)
New hardware will have drivers for whatever is in the market's best interest, not Microsoft's. Its not that long since 95-8 drivers were available for everything on the disk that came with the hardware. I'm guessing the first thing that will drop XP support will be games. And then only of the c# and.net stuff forces them to do so. If sales for Vista only games don't do so well, then publishers are not going to go out of their way to fragment their markets.
But are the Dell Linux machines aimed at the average user, or at people already familiar with Linux to at least a basic level? I'm still very much a noob myself, but it only took me a few minutes to figure out things like the video drivers and codecs up and running on Ubuntu when I tried it out. Codec Buddy and the package manager make things incredibly easy even for a novice like me. Perhaps the next version will be even easier. And for the record, I'm using Fedora, not Ubuntu myself.
Windows isn't that easy for a novice user to set up either. Even off the shelf computers have a series of pitfalls. Virus scanner demos that run out but the user doesn't understand the significance, MS firewall not interrogating traffic both directions, defragmenting the hard drive.. The list of problems that the ever present Joe Sixpack can get themselves into with Windows is pretty much endless. Is a PC running Ubuntu that different?
Ubuntu on a Dell isn't a brainless system, but neither is Windows. Especially if the victim/user had a computer before and wants to use their old hardware with Vista.
B) The Fingerprints are carefully examined to make sure it is the actual fingerprint and not a similar one.
C) The fingerprints being flagged are the ones that correspond to actual dangerous people, not protesters or other people who peacefully reject the actions of their or other governments.
D) The computer system doesn't have some almighty foul up which gives false positives and ends up having an innocent traveler locked up just to be on the safe side.
E) The fingerprint on record was taken as part of a crime scene sweep when someone was arrested, and put on the system just in case. Even though the print could belong to someone completely innocent.
In isolation a finger print means very little. Where and when it was obtained gives it context.
The flaw in the CD vs Vinyl debate is that to really get the benefit of a good recording on Vinyl, you need good equipment and carefully handled media. Neither of which is a given for the bulk of the people who are going to listen to the music.
Vinyl lost out to CD in the same way that reel to reel tape lost out to compact cassettes. Portability, toughness and the sound was good enough.
Slashdot Mirror
There are two ways of going about getting what we want.
1) The vinegar method. "WE DEMAND OPEN DRIVERS RIGHT NOW FOR ALL YOUR HARDWARE. WE DON'T CARE THAT YOU ARE JUST AS INCONVINENCED BY THIS AS WE ARE, AND WE DON'T CARE THAT YOU CAN'T IN MANY CASES OPEN THE PATENTED PRINCIPLES THAT YOU ARE GRANTED BY A THIRD PARTY" (pause to wipe saliva from mouth)
Stick to your principles rigidly and shun any binary blobs that pollute the free open source principle dogmatically. The hardware manufacturers will soon be falling over themselves to court the wallets of the tiny picky minority of Linux users... not! Ogg is more efficient than MP3, but which one does the PMP industry use? although it is slowly getting better.
Result:- Nobody outside the small uber geek community that would put up with the pain of having to carefully research every single bit of hardware, and then spend forever trying to reverse engineer it gives a damn. Forget Linux having a wider audience. Mister open source evangelist.. meet mister door.
2) The honey method. Get a visible presence in the market to the point where the hardware companies are actively producing drivers for Linux as a matter of course so they can sell to a significant market. Get behind the open driver project one of the kernel guys has set up where they write Linux drivers to be included in the kernel under NDA if required, but as source instead of binary blobs. They offer this as a free service to the hardware industry, and a few have already taken advantage of it. There was a time when companies charged for manuals and drivers. Now everything comes on a disk, and can be downloaded for free.
Sell the idea to the hardware guys as a way of reducing their driver creation overheads. They can have the code written for nothing, and the community then maintains the drivers, while still keeping their trade secrets.
Result:-Win win. Everybody happy. Companies become Linux partners instead of being Microsoft minions, and both systems get drivers.
The flaw with Open source purity is that you can only demand that the industry does something if you are big enough to hurt their market if they don't cooperate. Currently, Linux is a gnat attacking an elephant. But it doesn't always have to be that way.
Dell have already said that they will show preference to open source drivers in their Linux hardware choices, and it is easier to make a distro and track problems with open drivers, and if a driver is already in the distro, no set up is needed. So who apart from the hardware makers is benefiting from there being closed drivers in the long term? And even that is not clear, as they benefit from having better drivers and the appearance of being more reliable.
As far as Shuttleworth keeping faith with the Linux community, remember that he doesn't actually own Linux, and as we have seen, the FSF is quite capable of making things awkward for those who like to take without giving back, or any of a multitude of Linux components could break Ubuntu in nothing flat. He may have the most popular ease of use distro at the moment, but there are many waiting in the wings to take over should he do something daft.
It will take time, and it could all go very wrong, but it could also go very right. We will just have to wait and see.
Those who have had good experiences are either lucky that the combination of hardware they have is better supported and powerful enough, or they specifically combed forums and articles for any pitfalls they can avoid. If I was recommending an OS to anybody for a computer they were buying right now, I'd go for Linux or XP every time depending on the needs of the user. Vista.. no way. There are just too many gotchas right now. In a year or two when the hardware support is there and there are apps that will actually take advantage of Vista, then it would make sense, but for now, its too much pain when things go wrong.
A computer capable or running Vista is going to be close enough to a gamer's PC of a year or two ago from what I've read, while Linux or XP can run happily on a half gig of memory and a modest cheap processor. Not everyone is a gamer, and those that are, are not always going to go for the latest graphics intensive frag fest that needs the latest video card and an insane amount of power. For an enthusiast, this isn't a problem, but for someone looking for a general purpose PC, its overkill.
Slashdotters are tech lovers, but some of us are also realists. Computers are used for more than the latest games. Some people find a system that works reliably and is easy to fix when it does go wrong preferable to spending a significant amount of money on features that are not important to them. Spending $400 on a hot video card is pointless if the most demanding thing you do is a little photo retouching. And non slashdotters are often not interested in the tech, just getting the apps they have paid good money for continuing to work, and to be able to get their work done like they did before.
Well.. except for the little fact that Dell and the other big multinationals tend to buy in incredible bulk, so get better prices than even the normal wholesale price for components. So they still have an edge. A small vendor may sell a few dozen PCs a month, but the Dells of the world sell thousands. Dell can also go direct to the manufacturer instead of giving a wholesaler a cut.
I doubt Dell is scared at all.
The local guy is not going to have a big well advertised brand which the customer is going to want. I've seen so many people go to a chain store and buy the own brand garbage or big brand systems again and again. If they are very lucky they get a good one and it stays working. If not, they just go back again and get another because the salesman tells them this is the best deal.
While the little guy could go out of business next week, a big company is perceived to be more stable. To most users, there are no upgrade options once it leaves the shop, so the idea that someone else could fix it is not even considered, and customised parts or cases emphasise the point.
And the final advantage is the bundle deal. The big guys can sweeten the deal with a cheap digital camera, a scanner/printer/fax, a bunch of "free" apps etc. The little guy will usually only pre install what the customer specifies and charges for each one. Even though the latter deal is better, the big name deal looks better.
Dell have a big market. The people who just want a computer and think one is as good as another. This doesn't really cross over to the people who want more input into what they are buying. Both can exist in parallel.
Even with Linux instead of Windows, they will still have a niche. Its like the stereo market. Some will happily buy an all in one system with cheap plastic speakers and bell wire connections, others will go for a more upmarket all in one, others will go for separates of the same brand, and still others will carefully pour over reviews and talk on forums so they can get the best match of components they can afford. All markets earn enough to provide the competition and the diversity that keep these markets in existence.
Which is what the WGA is for. Installing XP with a dodgy key is a doddle, and most of the pirate copies of Windows are the corporate one which doesn't need activation. But when it comes to foiling the WGA to get updates, then the fun starts. Even if someone finds a work around, there will be another version out that will neutralize the crack. Thus, Windows may be easy to pirate, but less easy to keep pirated. And no doubt, Vista is a step up in the game.
To make this emerging market friendly, you just have to ignore a few of the cracks if the person signing up to the update site is from there, or make the WGA process a little less effective for now based on the location of the user.
Over here in the UK, we have access to dozens of broadband suppliers, and a variety of speeds and prices. This was achieved by stopping the main telecom company(who own the physical lines)from overcharging and excluding competitors from offering a service. They are still allowed to compete, but they were forced to spin off the broadband provision aspect, and buy the connection aspect from themselves for the same price as the other broadband companies so they would not have an unfair advantage. State intervention can be done constructively, and when it is, it is a good deal for the consumer.
I never suggested that anybody should listen to every random person about any random topic. My point was that dismissing someone because of a political leaning is short sighted. Especially as the main point of the article was dealing with the financial aspect of the problem as much if not more than the political aspect. As is refusing to listen to anybody with a different view to your own.
For someone with so little time, you seem to be willing to spend quite a bit of it replying to this thread. Terribly sorry for wasting such a rare commodity.
If I'm deciding which ISP to use or which TV set to buy, then I find as many relevant articles as possible, and make up my mind by assessing the various view points. I may find half a dozen reviews on a given product that sing it's praises, but one that calls it a pile of crap. Do I assume that due to the majority view being positive, the one dissenter is wrong? Or do I investigate their dislike of the product in question to see if they have a valid point, and that the other reviews were written by people of limited knowledge of the topic or paid to advertise it, thus containing inaccurate information? There are an infinite number of points of view. It would only be logical to evaluate everyone's opinion if you have infinite time to be alive and to do so. Barring that, it's only logical to prioritize. And within that, it's logical to place the opinions of people who are known to spew last in the order of evaluation. For an infinite number of topics, yes, there are theoretically an infinite number of views in total, but for any given subject, the number of views is decidedly finite. The article was dealing with a very specific topic, so the number of possible views is quite small. And the more specific the topic, the fewer possible relevant opinions apply, and of those, the number that stand up to scrutiny is even smaller.
If you take the time to comment on the topic, then you obviously have an interest in it, so spending time gathering information on the off chance that there is an aspect you have yet to consider is a good use of time. Then at least you will be able to challenge the conclusions in a rational way. Dismissing it out of hand is a waste of time.
So ignore the messenger and concentrate on the message. Does having broadband services carved up between a limited number of companies make for more competition than making th telecom and cable companies act only as carriers for the same services? And if they are the only ones who can make an economically viable business doing this, are they going to have any real incentive to improve the service and reduce the cost to end users? Its a perfectly valid question, and many will agree with the author's conclusion.
As to price, Microsoft makes it's money from pre installs and corporate licensing. Not retail sales, for which the price is already way too much when compared to the OEM versions.
It is a pretty good example though. German archaeologists and anthropologists took a long time to be taken seriously after that. Is it any different to someone doing research on Global warming, or trying to figure out just how much oil is left while having their research funded by the big oil companies? No matter how good the research either way, there is always going to be a stain of doubt over the accuracy of their findings.
Congratulations sir... You are the people we are trying to get off the street. Please present yourself at your nearest police station with a full confession to each of these crimes and any others not detailed above.
This is exactly the problem. Would the same person expect to be able to play the violin just because they bought one?
And as Microsoft have no real obligation to keep supporting older versions of their operating system with the DRM mechanism that this service uses, so a service that people will come to rely on will be forced into endless upgrades if they wish to keep using it. If the BBC insists on using Microsoft software to deliver the service, thats fine. So long as they provide the means for the service to be used with other platforms as they do now with the radio and TV programs they already stream from the BBC website.
As it stands. Only those with Windows will be able to use the proposed service, but with multi platform services, there is no suggestion of cutting windows users off. Thus choice is offered. Linux, Windows, OSX, some later to be designed set top box with an internet connection built in perhaps. Its all good.
Funny thing.. I upgraded my Linux box over the weekend. After the hardware was set up, I just switched on the computer and it worked perfectly. No drivers for the motherboard, no video card drivers, no sound card drivers etc. I have been in the same position with Windows and its easier to just install from scratch than to remove the old drivers and install the new ones. I'm not completely sure how Windows install images are made, but for a company with a variety of hardware permutations, wouldn't a single Linux image pre loaded onto the entire line of Linux computers less hassle?
So who was buying the 90% of Lenovo machines with no OS?
So how many people actually use the whizz bang stuff in Office?
Didn't Microsoft have to extend the cut off point for 98 by a year or two? No reason to think it will be any different for XP. If anything, I would imagine there are more XP systems around than 98. Some will go to Linux or OSX, some will grudgingly go to Vosta or whatever comes after, and some will keep running ol unpatched XP systems until the computer dies. Besides.. Who knows what the computer market will be like in 2012+
And what exactly is so hard about using Ubuntu? From a geek point of view, its incredibly easy without reading a single line of instruction. For a complete noob, general operation is no different to Windows, and I would assume one of the reasons they chose Ubuntu was that it is exceptionally to set up with things like codecs and video card drivers. The wireless networking will already be auto detected, so another common problem out the window.
And if you think many computer illiterate users can't wreck a carefully set up and tuned Windows install in that space of time, you are obviously not dealing with the people I fix computers for. Even with a firewall and a virus scanner, they still manage to get full of all kinds of junk, so the only fast thing about their new computer is how quickly it gets owned.
:-)
Without any bias. Purely based on the fact that there isn't any of the huge amount of malware that runs on Windows, they would be better off with Ubuntu. But then I'd lose money
New hardware will have drivers for whatever is in the market's best interest, not Microsoft's. Its not that long since 95-8 drivers were available for everything on the disk that came with the hardware. I'm guessing the first thing that will drop XP support will be games. And then only of the c# and .net stuff forces them to do so. If sales for Vista only games don't do so well, then publishers are not going to go out of their way to fragment their markets.
But are the Dell Linux machines aimed at the average user, or at people already familiar with Linux to at least a basic level? I'm still very much a noob myself, but it only took me a few minutes to figure out things like the video drivers and codecs up and running on Ubuntu when I tried it out. Codec Buddy and the package manager make things incredibly easy even for a novice like me. Perhaps the next version will be even easier. And for the record, I'm using Fedora, not Ubuntu myself.
Windows isn't that easy for a novice user to set up either. Even off the shelf computers have a series of pitfalls. Virus scanner demos that run out but the user doesn't understand the significance, MS firewall not interrogating traffic both directions, defragmenting the hard drive.. The list of problems that the ever present Joe Sixpack can get themselves into with Windows is pretty much endless. Is a PC running Ubuntu that different?
Ubuntu on a Dell isn't a brainless system, but neither is Windows. Especially if the victim/user had a computer before and wants to use their old hardware with Vista.
Assuming:-
A) The fingerprints are taken properly.
B) The Fingerprints are carefully examined to make sure it is the actual fingerprint and not a similar one.
C) The fingerprints being flagged are the ones that correspond to actual dangerous people, not protesters or other people who peacefully reject the actions of their or other governments.
D) The computer system doesn't have some almighty foul up which gives false positives and ends up having an innocent traveler locked up just to be on the safe side.
E) The fingerprint on record was taken as part of a crime scene sweep when someone was arrested, and put on the system just in case. Even though the print could belong to someone completely innocent.
In isolation a finger print means very little. Where and when it was obtained gives it context.
The flaw in the CD vs Vinyl debate is that to really get the benefit of a good recording on Vinyl, you need good equipment and carefully handled media. Neither of which is a given for the bulk of the people who are going to listen to the music.
Vinyl lost out to CD in the same way that reel to reel tape lost out to compact cassettes. Portability, toughness and the sound was good enough.