Who's on crack now?
$6000 to migrate 1000 users. You gotta be kidding me. Do you imagine that your one Exchange admin is going to load and configure software and provide some kind of training for 1000 users? Har.
Between that and your comments on viri it's pretty obvious you have never experienced the real world. Try telling a pointy haired manager that it's his fault that he sent the "I Love You" virus to all his golfing buddies down at the country club. You'll quickly find yourself on the street trying to peddle your half-assed Exchange configuration to some other sucker.
But, but, but they said in MSCE class that it would work just fine!
Voting for Nader as a vote for personal liberties? Now that's funny. The man is a socialist, pure and simple. You'll have no time for pot when you're waking up at 4AM to ride your bike 20 miles to the People's Agricultural Collective to hand pick organicly grown soy beans.
The only party that truly supports individual liberty is the Libertarian party. Drug addicts with guns - now there's a party with vision.
A quick purusal of Debian's bug database turns up over 9800 bugs. Over 500 of those bugs are rated "important" or higher. Bugs listed as "grave" have been in their database for four years.
Does this merit a snide slashdot headline with a smirky little *grin*? Hell no, I like Debian. It's just unfortunate that our heros at slashdot don't have the ability to keep this kind of stuff in perspective. They seem more interesting in fanning the flames of the distro-wars.
It's not entirely clear what you're trying to say here. I have no problem with criticism of Redhat based on fair and accurate information. Repeating an erroneous report that Redhat 7.0 has over 2000 outstanding bugs is neither fair or accurate.
I can't believe the folks at Slashdot are allowing this "story" to remain uncorrected on their front page. This story was an obvious troll by someone on "linuxnewbie.com" intended to stir up the usual crowd of Redhat bashers. The fact that Slashdot has picked the story up without bothering to even verify its content is very dissappointing.
Can someone recommend a similar site that doesn't rely on Bashdotters to generate traffic?
Thank you for supporting open source software. Thank you for supporting Linux. Now would you please stop goofing off and get to work on a fix for the hundreds of bugs that infest WordPerfect Office 200 for Linux?
Seriously, WordPerfect Office 2000 is a great demo of the what can be done with Wine. It shows what a killer ap WPO 2000 for Linux could be, but it's way to unstable to take seriously as a finished product.
Please - before you irrepairably harm your reputation with the Linux community try to focus long enough to fix the bugs in the programs you're already selling.
Sincerely,
Someone who has already lost way to much work to WPO 2000
I like the idea, but how did these bands get into a position to do something like this? How did they gain enough fans to be able to make money on such a scheme? Nine times out of ten that popularity was bought and paid for by huge record company promotional budgets. That's a big chunk of what you're paying for when you pay $16 for a CD that costs $1.00 to produce.
Yes, it's possible for an artist to make a living without selling themselves into indentured servitude with the record company, but it takes endless touring and tons of blood, sweat and tears to get to the point where you can make a decent living at it. Of course the average Napster user isn't going to help one bit in that struggle. They're too busy looking for the latest Limp Bizkit downloads.
So what's a starving artist to do? Truth be told most of them would still rather keep hoping that the record company will ask them to sign away their soul for a three record deal. They've got a better chance of making a living that way than hoping that the Napster generation will ever figure out that they should be paying the artist for their entertainment.
It's funny that the Napster revolutionaries like to think they're fighting the power by stealing what the record company has convinced them they must have.
Q: "How much does creation of GNOME Foundation affect KDE development?" A: "As much as the birth of the last baby polar bear at the Quebec City Zoo" (i.e., not at all) "
If they really believed that the wouldn't have to bother with an "official response" to the GNOME Foundation, now would they? In general this response makes some very good points, but the false bravado in the intro is a little silly.
Mindshare does matter. They obviously know that because they talk a lot about their own mindshare in their response. So basically we're supposed to believe that their mindshare will influence the GNOME Foundation, ("Any attempt to proclaim 'we are THE standard' without our involvement is just silly") but GNOME's won't have any affect on them.
To me the bottom line is that the Sun and HP's decision to adopt GNOME have proven the whole premise behind GNOME development - the need for a truely free desktop. Because of the licensing issues it's very unlikely that Sun and HP would have ever adopted KDE as their default desktop.
You know, I really admire all the great work Miguel has done. I'm a long time Gnome users and Helix Gnome simply rules. But it's comments like this that make me wonder whether Miguel's the one smoking crack. It's the OS, stupid! It's supposed to manage processes, memory, disk and other resources. It's not supposed to decide policy or provide user level services - that way lies the blue screen of death! Okay, so the X window system sucks. Wow, there's a bulletin. Come up with something better and we can talk. Good God man, you can't even agree with the KDE people on a component architecture, but you're lamenting the fact that UNIX doesn't set policy? Like you'd really be using whatever they came up with anyway?!
Well, it was more than just a bunch of bitmapped TTY's but I'm not sure whether it qualifyied as a GUI. Probably about as much so as raw X. The idea was to download code to the Blit for execution locally, sort of like Java without the bytecode. The whole thing worked over serial lines so it got left behind pretty quickly as real networks became available.
Tivo isn't ~$1000. 30 hour units can be had for $599 and will very soon be down to $399. The linux kernel is pretty small when it's not built with everything but the kitchen sink. Beyond that it doesn't require any more resources than any other embedded OS to get it's job done.
Why do you say that the subscription is required? Everything I have read says that it is not. From their FAQ:
Without the TiVo Service the receiver can perform limited functions. It can only pause live TV, record, and playback programs that have been manually selected by time.
Obviously the functionality without the service is limited but no more so than a normal VCR.
Pure nonsense. Tivo doesn't report anything to HQ and you can buy a lifetime subscription or just skip it all together if you don't want the service. ReplayTV includes the cost of the subscription into every unit whether you want it or not.
The choice between ReplayTV and Tivo is really about which hardware and user interface you prefer. I prefer Tivo. YMMV.
I've had my Tivo for about a month now and I love it. It changes the way you watch TV. The programs you want to watch are on when you want to watch them.
I don't care for the 14 hour quality much, the picture is okay, but the motion artifacts bug me. I record most shows medium quality and it looks better than the best VCR quality to me. Medium quality gives you about 8.5 hours which isn't bad.
Where I run into trouble is with sports. I record sports at Best quality to avoid any motion artifacts and that gives you only 4.5 hours on a 14 hour Tivo. When racing season rolls around again things are going to get pretty tight. By then I hope to have something with more capacity. Phillips is supposed to make 30 hour upgrades available and Sony is rumored to be coming out with a combined DBS/Tivo unit that could be worth looking into.
I doubt that the internet is really a viable distribution medium quite yet. There just aren't enough people with high speed access. It's a great way to build a following and maybe sell some CD's but you'll get poor in a hurry paying for the bandwidth for people to download your music for free if you're not selling something.
The closest thing I've seen to what you're talking about is the Deadreckoners. The Deadreckoners are a group of artists from the Nashville area who started their own indie label, play on on another's recordings and so on. Most of the artists are country but if you want to hear some smokin' blues check out Mike Henderson and the Bluebloods.
You're missing the point. Denial of service attacks are a security problem. They're just a hint of the kinds of security problems that Napster could have hidden in their proprietary protocol.
I'm glad to hear that Napster is going to fix their known problems "real soon now." I was not making assumptions, I was responding to a summary of the chat with Napster which said:
Shortly after this, Shawn and Ryan had an irc discussion in which Shawn reiterated his belief that the existence of an open source client would invite abuses of the Napster server. He also pointed out that Napster plans to roll out some anti-abuse features in a future server. Ryan asked for a timeline, but Shawn basically said he couldn't say when that would be.
So does this mean that Napster has set a timeline now that they've had their feet held to the fire or were they just once again being deliberately obscure?
Your writeup makes reference to slashdot's "irresponsible journalism." In some way's I agree, they do sometimes go off half cocked. But in this case I think there's still a very real issue. The effort by "the GNOME people" and Napster to smooth things over and make nice should not be allowed to hide the fact that Napster seems determined to ignore the problems with "security through obscurity" until it jumps up and bites them on the ass.
Obviously they're too busy trying to ride the wave they've created to worry about something as trivial as security.
Slashdot Mirror
If you think that's the solution then you don't understand the problem.
Between that and your comments on viri it's pretty obvious you have never experienced the real world. Try telling a pointy haired manager that it's his fault that he sent the "I Love You" virus to all his golfing buddies down at the country club. You'll quickly find yourself on the street trying to peddle your half-assed Exchange configuration to some other sucker.
But, but, but they said in MSCE class that it would work just fine!
The only party that truly supports individual liberty is the Libertarian party. Drug addicts with guns - now there's a party with vision.
Does this merit a snide slashdot headline with a smirky little *grin*? Hell no, I like Debian. It's just unfortunate that our heros at slashdot don't have the ability to keep this kind of stuff in perspective. They seem more interesting in fanning the flames of the distro-wars.
It's not entirely clear what you're trying to say here. I have no problem with criticism of Redhat based on fair and accurate information. Repeating an erroneous report that Redhat 7.0 has over 2000 outstanding bugs is neither fair or accurate.
Can someone recommend a similar site that doesn't rely on Bashdotters to generate traffic?
Thank you for supporting open source software. Thank you for supporting Linux. Now would you please stop goofing off and get to work on a fix for the hundreds of bugs that infest WordPerfect Office 200 for Linux?
Seriously, WordPerfect Office 2000 is a great demo of the what can be done with Wine. It shows what a killer ap WPO 2000 for Linux could be, but it's way to unstable to take seriously as a finished product.
Please - before you irrepairably harm your reputation with the Linux community try to focus long enough to fix the bugs in the programs you're already selling.
Sincerely, Someone who has already lost way to much work to WPO 2000
Yes, it's possible for an artist to make a living without selling themselves into indentured servitude with the record company, but it takes endless touring and tons of blood, sweat and tears to get to the point where you can make a decent living at it. Of course the average Napster user isn't going to help one bit in that struggle. They're too busy looking for the latest Limp Bizkit downloads.
So what's a starving artist to do? Truth be told most of them would still rather keep hoping that the record company will ask them to sign away their soul for a three record deal. They've got a better chance of making a living that way than hoping that the Napster generation will ever figure out that they should be paying the artist for their entertainment.
It's funny that the Napster revolutionaries like to think they're fighting the power by stealing what the record company has convinced them they must have.
If they really believed that the wouldn't have to bother with an "official response" to the GNOME Foundation, now would they? In general this response makes some very good points, but the false bravado in the intro is a little silly.
Mindshare does matter. They obviously know that because they talk a lot about their own mindshare in their response. So basically we're supposed to believe that their mindshare will influence the GNOME Foundation, ("Any attempt to proclaim 'we are THE standard' without our involvement is just silly") but GNOME's won't have any affect on them.
To me the bottom line is that the Sun and HP's decision to adopt GNOME have proven the whole premise behind GNOME development - the need for a truely free desktop. Because of the licensing issues it's very unlikely that Sun and HP would have ever adopted KDE as their default desktop.
You know, I really admire all the great work Miguel has done. I'm a long time Gnome users and Helix Gnome simply rules. But it's comments like this that make me wonder whether Miguel's the one smoking crack. It's the OS, stupid! It's supposed to manage processes, memory, disk and other resources. It's not supposed to decide policy or provide user level services - that way lies the blue screen of death! Okay, so the X window system sucks. Wow, there's a bulletin. Come up with something better and we can talk. Good God man, you can't even agree with the KDE people on a component architecture, but you're lamenting the fact that UNIX doesn't set policy? Like you'd really be using whatever they came up with anyway?!
Here's a page with some info about the 5620 and related terminals: http://www.bell-labs.com/user/dwd/56 20faq.html
Tivo isn't ~$1000. 30 hour units can be had for $599 and will very soon be down to $399. The linux kernel is pretty small when it's not built with everything but the kitchen sink. Beyond that it doesn't require any more resources than any other embedded OS to get it's job done.
The choice between ReplayTV and Tivo is really about which hardware and user interface you prefer. I prefer Tivo. YMMV.
Tivo lists at $499, not $600.
There, go buy.
I don't care for the 14 hour quality much, the picture is okay, but the motion artifacts bug me. I record most shows medium quality and it looks better than the best VCR quality to me. Medium quality gives you about 8.5 hours which isn't bad.
Where I run into trouble is with sports. I record sports at Best quality to avoid any motion artifacts and that gives you only 4.5 hours on a 14 hour Tivo. When racing season rolls around again things are going to get pretty tight. By then I hope to have something with more capacity. Phillips is supposed to make 30 hour upgrades available and Sony is rumored to be coming out with a combined DBS/Tivo unit that could be worth looking into.
The closest thing I've seen to what you're talking about is the Deadreckoners. The Deadreckoners are a group of artists from the Nashville area who started their own indie label, play on on another's recordings and so on. Most of the artists are country but if you want to hear some smokin' blues check out Mike Henderson and the Bluebloods.
I'm glad to hear that Napster is going to fix their known problems "real soon now." I was not making assumptions, I was responding to a summary of the chat with Napster which said:
So does this mean that Napster has set a timeline now that they've had their feet held to the fire or were they just once again being deliberately obscure?Obviously they're too busy trying to ride the wave they've created to worry about something as trivial as security.