I've always said that 3.0 is the REAL test of Linux. Once you have a base, you can call upon thousands of people to make tweaks to it, and add new pieces.
Trying to "start from scratch" with a distributed community trying to decide things even a little bit democratically, is a nightmare in the making.
This is not to say that the 2x kernel cannot evolve for a couple years to come, however at some point, computing will make more major changes than it has in the past 10 years and a fresh start WILL be required. I don't actually think that Linux can do it...but if it can it will likely last forever.
I dont generally like to be amused by other people's misfortune, however this story makes me chuckle. This is just the kind of thing that will always happen to "community" based projects. There's a certain point where "community" doesn't work, and you have to do it yourself.
People tend to associate Linux or OSS with everything being "free from the evil of money", however for the malicious person, there is always money to be made....and so stuff like this needs to be carefully monitored by PAID people.
Dont rule out Live.com search. I know it's evil to say around here, but it has come a LONG way and sometimes gives me the best (most "trustworthy") results.
Novell *could* pick out the parts in Linux that SCO was claiming it owned via Unix copyrights and tell all other vendors that they cannot include those parts because they are copyrighted. Force those parts out of Linux.
Then they could include all of those parts as part of SuSE, while other Linux vendors cannot use them. It becomes "value added" service of Novell/SuSE.
It *could* happen like that, not saying it *will*.
SCO was a linux distributor too. They would not want to "kill linux", however they might want to have a linux "with more stuff than the other guys, cause they cant use our UNIX intellectual property".
Wow, you TOTALLY misunderstand the rules. The court that that SCO cannot sue because "it does not own the Unix code in question". Novell does. There's nothing stopping Novell from filing a similar suit.
Notice how the article talks about RedHat and Novell. Nowhere does it mention Debian or Slackware.
The result of this lawsuit is that Novell now holds the intellectual property that SCO claimed has been integrated into Linux. I wonder what it would take for them to use it for something?
Secondly all this does is solidify the idea that "If you're going to use Linux, you need legal protection from this sort of thing" It kind of legitimizes the type of deal that Novell has made with Microsoft.
That is more my point! It's not about "winning a law suit", however it is a step toward legitimizing the fact that Linux may have Unix IP in it.
Novell could be in a position to make some big additions to its for-pay linux distribution, using Unix code....and leave it out of reach (except for a fee) from other Linux distributions. "Novell Tax" on Linux.
Another self destructive attitude with Linux.
"If they wont play nice, then we cont support their stuff"
good move. push Linux more into obscurity by not supporting modern technologies.
It kind of hints at something big missed last week though, when it comes to patents:
If Microsoft 0wnz Novell
and Novell 0wnz Unix
and SCO failed it's lawsuit against linux for the reason of "not owning Unix in the first place"
Could Novell now have an trump card when it comes to Linux?.....could it take the same patent lawsuit against Linux that SCO attempted, while using it's rightful ownership?
I made my first comment without reading the full article. Now that I read it, I'm thoroughly amused!!!
It seems that Mozilla is "finally get it", and in the process, going against some of the things that the OSS community generally detests. I'll comment on their 12-step program (just the ones i find interesting):
1. Change Firefox icon label to closer resemble action of getting to web
Wow! They finally realized that the name "Firefox" doesn't make ANY connection to the internet for standard users. 2. Force the Firefox icon to easier to find location
ha! They're going to load down systems with icons to Firefox EVERYWHERE on a person's machine. I guess they figured they'd follow the lead of Real Player.....everyone loves how the real player icons show up everywhere. 7. Make common plug-ins work out of the box
In other words...they're going to consider Firefox to be "Firefox plus the top few plug-ins as a package", at least for comparison purposes and feature lists. Wasn't Firefox supposed to be the Non-bloated sister of Mozilla? Someone's lost their way. 9. Make the web feel more human
Let's add a bunch of eye-candy to use up CPU cycles of all these Dual-Core processors! Why not, people like Vista! 11. Stickier start page
We're going to make it hard to change your start page, you know...like MSN
I do believe this might be close %. I've often observed even hardcore FireFox advocate using IE. Usually they seem embarrassed and have some excuse:
"I reloaded my system and havent had time to put FF back on"
"This is my work machine and I'm not allowed"
"I have some stupid site that only works with IE, so it's easier this way"
"I keep firefox on my USB drive and I left it home today"
Holy Moly! Thats pretty impressive. If that was a music album it would already be considered "platinum". All that without any hardcore marketing.
I guess it's true that the game industry is going to surpass the music industry, if it hasnt already.
I generally think that the open-source community does this fine without anyone's help. Microsoft saw the opportunity to use it's weakness and exploited it.
Its kinda sad, but true. I've worked in IT for 10 years. Of the dozen or so women I've worked with the successful ones are attractive (or sometimes slutty instead). The ones that are less than attractive seem to have a more difficult time.
Dont get me wrong I've seen a couple non-attractive women who REALLY know their stuff do very well. And I've never seen an attractive bimbo get far in IT. However for the middle-of-the-line types, the attractive ones seem to do better. Though I suppose this isnt specific to IT.
That might be a valid point *IF* you're using php and mysql. I was just talking about Apache vs IIS. If you count entire platform: Apache/PHP/mySQL and compare it to IIS/ASP/SQL (SQL Express), is there any compelling reason to chose one or the other?
The person above asked if there's any compelling reason not to use apache.
I think the question to ask is if there's any compelling reason not to use IIS. I'm sure people will spew "because it's Microsoft and you dont want your website hacked", but that's not what I'm talking about. IIS has had some problems in the past, but these days it's pretty good.
The question is when an organization already has an investment in Windows, and local domains, management tools etc....is there any reason not to use IIS? Does apache provide anything above and beyond what IIS provides when it comes to general website hosting?
That's is an irrelevant number. The "average wage" in China might be $135 a month or something like that, but the people who work for that much money would never have a computer in the first place. Therefore they aren't part of the marketing target.
The people who live in the cities where a computers and Internet are actually valuable, make MUCH more than the average wage.
This is no different than Google Documents & Spreadsheets. It's just ad-supported office applications. However, the fact that it's locally installed is nice, because it allows for more advanced functionality than AJAX.
I think Microsoft has a winner with this one. Not just because of the ad revenue, but because of the user lock-in. Users of works would be more likely to upgrade to MS office. smart move.
Except that in this case, your device is tied to a plan that monitors the usage.
Dear Sir,
We have received your RMA, and while your iPhone appears to be 100% uncustomized, we have noted that 5 days ago the device was accepting connections on port 80, which is a violation of your warrany, as stated clearly:
This warranty does not apply: (a) to damage caused by use with non-Apple products; (b) to damage caused by accident, abuse, misuse, flood, fire,
earthquake or other external causes; (c) to damage caused by operating the product outside the permitted or intended uses described by Apple; (d)
to damage caused by service (including upgrades and expansions) performed by anyone who is not a representative of Apple or an Apple Authorized
Service Provider ("AASP"); (e) to a product or part that has been modified to alter functionality or capability without the written permission of Apple; (f )
to consumable parts, such as batteries, unless damage has occurred due to a defect in materials or workmanship; (g) to cosmetic damage, including but
not limited to scratches, dents and broken plastic on ports; or (h) if any Apple serial number has been removed or defaced.
If you would like to purchase a refurnished unit, please contact our sales departmnet.
Slashdot Mirror
I've always said that 3.0 is the REAL test of Linux. Once you have a base, you can call upon thousands of people to make tweaks to it, and add new pieces.
Trying to "start from scratch" with a distributed community trying to decide things even a little bit democratically, is a nightmare in the making.
This is not to say that the 2x kernel cannot evolve for a couple years to come, however at some point, computing will make more major changes than it has in the past 10 years and a fresh start WILL be required. I don't actually think that Linux can do it...but if it can it will likely last forever.
I dont generally like to be amused by other people's misfortune, however this story makes me chuckle. This is just the kind of thing that will always happen to "community" based projects. There's a certain point where "community" doesn't work, and you have to do it yourself.
People tend to associate Linux or OSS with everything being "free from the evil of money", however for the malicious person, there is always money to be made....and so stuff like this needs to be carefully monitored by PAID people.
Dont rule out Live.com search. I know it's evil to say around here, but it has come a LONG way and sometimes gives me the best (most "trustworthy") results.
This just in....work is stressful.
Novell *could* pick out the parts in Linux that SCO was claiming it owned via Unix copyrights and tell all other vendors that they cannot include those parts because they are copyrighted. Force those parts out of Linux.
Then they could include all of those parts as part of SuSE, while other Linux vendors cannot use them. It becomes "value added" service of Novell/SuSE.
It *could* happen like that, not saying it *will*.
SCO was a linux distributor too. They would not want to "kill linux", however they might want to have a linux "with more stuff than the other guys, cause they cant use our UNIX intellectual property".
Wow, you TOTALLY misunderstand the rules. The court that that SCO cannot sue because "it does not own the Unix code in question". Novell does. There's nothing stopping Novell from filing a similar suit.
Notice how the article talks about RedHat and Novell. Nowhere does it mention Debian or Slackware.
The result of this lawsuit is that Novell now holds the intellectual property that SCO claimed has been integrated into Linux. I wonder what it would take for them to use it for something?
Secondly all this does is solidify the idea that "If you're going to use Linux, you need legal protection from this sort of thing" It kind of legitimizes the type of deal that Novell has made with Microsoft.
That is more my point! It's not about "winning a law suit", however it is a step toward legitimizing the fact that Linux may have Unix IP in it.
Novell could be in a position to make some big additions to its for-pay linux distribution, using Unix code....and leave it out of reach (except for a fee) from other Linux distributions. "Novell Tax" on Linux.
Another self destructive attitude with Linux.
"If they wont play nice, then we cont support their stuff"
good move. push Linux more into obscurity by not supporting modern technologies.
It kind of hints at something big missed last week though, when it comes to patents:
If Microsoft 0wnz Novell
and Novell 0wnz Unix
and SCO failed it's lawsuit against linux for the reason of "not owning Unix in the first place"
Could Novell now have an trump card when it comes to Linux?.....could it take the same patent lawsuit against Linux that SCO attempted, while using it's rightful ownership?
So are you saying people that don't need to change to Firefox, because it offers them nothing extra they use, should switch anyway?
I made my first comment without reading the full article. Now that I read it, I'm thoroughly amused!!!
It seems that Mozilla is "finally get it", and in the process, going against some of the things that the OSS community generally detests. I'll comment on their 12-step program (just the ones i find interesting):
1. Change Firefox icon label to closer resemble action of getting to web
Wow! They finally realized that the name "Firefox" doesn't make ANY connection to the internet for standard users.
2. Force the Firefox icon to easier to find location
ha! They're going to load down systems with icons to Firefox EVERYWHERE on a person's machine. I guess they figured they'd follow the lead of Real Player.....everyone loves how the real player icons show up everywhere.
7. Make common plug-ins work out of the box
In other words...they're going to consider Firefox to be "Firefox plus the top few plug-ins as a package", at least for comparison purposes and feature lists. Wasn't Firefox supposed to be the Non-bloated sister of Mozilla? Someone's lost their way.
9. Make the web feel more human
Let's add a bunch of eye-candy to use up CPU cycles of all these Dual-Core processors! Why not, people like Vista!
11. Stickier start page
We're going to make it hard to change your start page, you know...like MSN
I do believe this might be close %. I've often observed even hardcore FireFox advocate using IE. Usually they seem embarrassed and have some excuse:
"I reloaded my system and havent had time to put FF back on"
"This is my work machine and I'm not allowed"
"I have some stupid site that only works with IE, so it's easier this way"
"I keep firefox on my USB drive and I left it home today"
Holy Moly! Thats pretty impressive. If that was a music album it would already be considered "platinum". All that without any hardcore marketing. I guess it's true that the game industry is going to surpass the music industry, if it hasnt already.
hahah! As I was hitting submit I saw it.....was too late!
I generally think that the open-source community does this fine without anyone's help. Microsoft saw the opportunity to use it's weakness and exploited it.
Welcome to capitolism.
Here's how to cope in IT as a woman: Be Pretty!
Its kinda sad, but true. I've worked in IT for 10 years. Of the dozen or so women I've worked with the successful ones are attractive (or sometimes slutty instead). The ones that are less than attractive seem to have a more difficult time.
Dont get me wrong I've seen a couple non-attractive women who REALLY know their stuff do very well. And I've never seen an attractive bimbo get far in IT. However for the middle-of-the-line types, the attractive ones seem to do better. Though I suppose this isnt specific to IT.
That might be a valid point *IF* you're using php and mysql. I was just talking about Apache vs IIS. If you count entire platform: Apache/PHP/mySQL and compare it to IIS/ASP/SQL (SQL Express), is there any compelling reason to chose one or the other?
The person above asked if there's any compelling reason not to use apache.
I think the question to ask is if there's any compelling reason not to use IIS. I'm sure people will spew "because it's Microsoft and you dont want your website hacked", but that's not what I'm talking about. IIS has had some problems in the past, but these days it's pretty good.
The question is when an organization already has an investment in Windows, and local domains, management tools etc....is there any reason not to use IIS? Does apache provide anything above and beyond what IIS provides when it comes to general website hosting?
This is old data, but I found it quickly. It should paint a pretty clear picture:
a n-rural
:)
http://www.gwu.edu/~econ270/Taejoon.html#a.%20Urb
Here's a more recent article that shows the trend continuing: http://www.worldwatch.org/node/4469
Again I didnt take time to find "just the right data", because I dont care enough
That's is an irrelevant number. The "average wage" in China might be $135 a month or something like that, but the people who work for that much money would never have a computer in the first place. Therefore they aren't part of the marketing target.
The people who live in the cities where a computers and Internet are actually valuable, make MUCH more than the average wage.
This is no different than Google Documents & Spreadsheets. It's just ad-supported office applications. However, the fact that it's locally installed is nice, because it allows for more advanced functionality than AJAX. I think Microsoft has a winner with this one. Not just because of the ad revenue, but because of the user lock-in. Users of works would be more likely to upgrade to MS office. smart move.
This just in...
Chicks don't like nerds
Yes, thats a good idea...spend extra money on a MAC and then EVEN MORE money on additional OS's to run ON the MAC, and hire more people to support it!
Dear Sir,
We have received your RMA, and while your iPhone appears to be 100% uncustomized, we have noted that 5 days ago the device was accepting connections on port 80, which is a violation of your warrany, as stated clearly:
If you would like to purchase a refurnished unit, please contact our sales departmnet.