Your point? They released some open source software to run on their computers for compatibility and to eat into a market, if they "break" the underlying OS hooks for XP/YP/ZP/2003 then they have no obligation to continue with these tools. This software is in no way comparable to them replacing a major piece of their own written technology with a more free version and especially it does not loosen their control over ?everything digital?
How long until MS uses Gecko? I think that will be sometime after:
They are split apart
They adopt Free Software and Open Standards across the board
95%+ of websites will ONLY render with the mozilla engine
RMS is appointed General/Technical/Absolute Manager
MS buys AOL
Hell freezes over
Seriously it will take a massive shift in MS for this to happen and it would probably be one of the least significant things which would appear from such a transition (I imagine a GPL WordViewer would be about top of the list and the biggest thing we could see). MS detests free software (or open software or anything that might prevent their control) and would pay a massive price rather than lose control of the internet browsing experiences of the web. I would actually expect it to be far more likely that MS will become more aggressive in locking out other browsers than IE wherever possible (think IIS, Frontpage and all the MS controlled sites). Hell they conned Tony "The Stooge" Blair into handing over large wadges of cash for the new government public internet portal which is completly IE dependant! Ah well let the battle commense again.
This does mean that we have to disabuse ourselves of the notion that a webpage must look the same on all browser
Any designer who thinks that a webpage could look the same on all browsers is very new to the game. Make sites that display the content reasonably anywhere that can understand the standards you use and forget about pixel accuracy. Personally I just write clean html code and let it look like it looks in all the different browsers.
Well, by my thinking, bad government gets fucked out until you get a good government which you keep. Pity it never happens (or maybe it did in the US not too long ago, but the system was so screwed they got fucked out and the sort of government that likes to start wars to boost the economy, start trade wars to return to protectionism and fucks the planet to save the economy got in instead!). All you can pray for is that if you EVER get a good government they WILL legislate to make sure the assholes who may follow them can't do stupid things without extreme difficulty, or would you rather government let government be, so the bad government screws you over every time?
$549 sounds like quite a normal price for a high-end mobile phone without subscription and not over the top. I don't believe I could get a GPRS phone here in Ireland for that price let alone less and that's for a phone, not a combo unit like this. Obviously we all want the Treo for $200 but face facts only the crummiest of mass-mass-mass produced phones reach those prices.
It's about choice, you can run your bridging firewall with no assigned IP address halted! It's not about how to do it. I thought about just running the kernel on a firewall device I may be designing (which is basically the same is it not). I pictured (possibly) a device that booted up and grabbed a kernel from a trusted network if it's present and reboots with it if it is, if not it is left with nothing but the kernel running (some oddities I had noticed in audio and networking had left me certain a lot could keep running). Call me mad but I envisioned hard coding the iptables into the kernel (I'm still not sure I'd actually run anything on the box, I would like to just run the kernel but that makes the updating more hackish). Whatever you want to do this is another way to secure the system (if it's appropriate for you).
Instead of shutting everything down simply have three boxes. At any given time one box is live on the edge of the network which is configured to simply switch all traffic between the two other boxes (thats a static config, it may take a bit of hacking to come up with a switching solution but it should be easy enough). The two other boxes are the real firewalls so you can update and test the new box and when ready signal the outer box to switch, then next change prep the other box. lather, rinse and repeat as neccessary.
Was it? Define devleoped? How many contributions to the source sharing nixs came from outside of the USA? It began in the US without a shadow of a doubt, and it is also without doubt that the most vocal commercial players (and Berkely) were in the USA but I find it incredibly hard to believe that the percentage of work put into developing the nixs outside of the USA is so small to be ignored (in Linux terms how valuable have SUSE been).
Well when I upgraded my rented video recorder and forgot to remove the blockbuster VHS from it I found out how much blockbuster said the video cost them, STG£75 in 1996! The video rental company eventually sent me out a video tape, but it was some other poor random punters home tape with some random TV on it NOT a 4 episode ST::TNG tape. I was receiving debt collectors letters from blockbuster until eventually about 3 months later I managed to get both companies to talk to each other and they did some deal together.
If Sun said tomorrow that they were going to release freeBSD on all products, IBM, HP and MS would all be far more wary about touching freeBSD for anything. The BSDs suffer from the fact that a closed schism can occur at any time, and in the hands of a company like Sun it would take a very very very long time before people ever imagined that they were not going to close their version. With the GPL Linux is purely collabaritive and hence when IBM put work into the kernel they are just moving the level playing field. How would Sun feel if they adopted freeBSD and put some of their "prize posessions" into its kernel and then Apple simply took those enhancements and integrated them into OS-X but never let Sun see how they integrated it or learn anything in return?
this sort of issue is what will drive companies away from adopting Linux
Feed the trolls, tuppence, tuppence.
Come on, get a grip! Do you run a MS OS? Have you read the license agreement? And for all your shareware, careware, postcardware (you do send a postcard don't you) and proprietary software (reading those licenses has to be one of the funniest things in the world as long as you don't want to use the software). One reason to move wine from a.n. other license to LGPL would be to have it under a common license, that way you can read one line and know whether you can use the software or not. This is a reason why people will move to Free software.
Call me a dummy but I assumed he meant the possibility of corrupting a distributed global namespace. I presume this features some form of strong authentication system (couldn't reach the site) but it could be pretty hairy if you were doing a make world out of this using any "unofficial" patch sources, but we all audit all the code we run don't we!
The Internet is his key (and yours) but if MS control the current standard Internet connection method AND offer a console AND offer handheld solutions they can use.NET across the platforms to lock out Linux! What DRM technology will be needed on an installed OS to access.NET, will you be able to see the source and will you be able to monitor your system to find out what it is doing (or even your network to see what it is saying)? Will you be able to stop it crashing, will you be able to run it on any hardware with enough power?
The reason it is neccessary to challenge MS on the desktop is the same as the reasons why QNX, Palm and Sony have to challenge in the spheres they can hit. If MS is allowed to lock everyone out of it's.NET (come on, is the name not a giveaway) and 90% of the world's PC's use it, 40% of the worlds handhelds and 15% of the worlds game consoles, how long until those figures are all 90% and we have multiple global "public" networks (and perhaps only one big one).
RedHat/GNU/Linux/FreeSoftware/OpenSource/etc may not defeat MS on the desktop, but if it can hold it in check (e.g. controlling a huge chunk of web servers thereby stopping MS from taking over the "web", and providing Sun with an Office Suite that may get enough PHBs to bite and make MS not bee too naughty) we might just be around to play on the next generation of hardware. If we ignore the desktop we make it that much easier for MS to end up deciding how the digital era progresses. Times are tough, but if we stick to our real guns (we want to participate equally and be allowed to follow our rules) across the board without cenceeding any areas (and especially not the front-end) then we might just make it work, if we concede anything it will be a wedge used technically, legally and emotionally to drive us out. MS don't want a platform, they want to grow, we have to stop them every way we can until they can no longer threaten us.
I've probably got something wrong but I'll try to clarify myself.
Under Ogg's initial licensing nobody other than xiph (with permission from external contributors perhaps) could have made a closed version of Ogg, now anyone can! If a company releases a closed spanky codec based around Ogg for (for example) the ARM, and then this becomes the ARM audio codec of choice Ogg will have suffered a micro-schism. If the closed version is in any way incompatible then Ogg could quickly become irrelevant to most people as their will be one version for their Win/Linux machines and one for their portable players (and maybe even another used for embedded audio in games etc.) and people will not want that. By allowing closed entrants into the game, it may mean itches don't develop in the same way (I can pay $5 and have an audio solution for my ARM or I can start writing one from scratch for a "won" market). What is to prevent an incompatible dominent (in any sphere) version of Ogg appearing which is closed source and therefore the Xiph libs can never (well we'll have to see about reverse engineering it and patent issues) play or encode. Ogg was a Free codec and now it is perhaps less so (imho, as you can tell I believe in the GPL style of copylefting, everyone is entitled to their opinion). I'm not happy about Ogg anymore, not sad about it yet but I fear that maybe I will be.
This is exactly the reason why I wondered if RMS should ever have given his blessing for the Ogg license switch. It would be one thing for someone to develop an Ogg implementation for ARM7 and then say "I'll give it source and all to the first person who coughs up $5m" but another entirely to say "we've done the work and we'll license it to you, why do you need a Free version?" The reason I feel the second options is so much worse is that it can tempt people out of doing work far easier than the Free version could (can you afford $5m? can you afford $2 / instance? How much will development cost and how many instances will be sold?)
Hopefully Ogg will survive this sort of teething (imagine if a modified hacked licensed ARM implementation became the de facto Ogg standard beacuse Sony use it in their OggMan). In the meantime I'm not happy about Ogg as a format anymore.
Should you not move the new plugins/libnull plugin.so into your plugins folder, then rmdir plugins and ln -s? Or is libnullplugin.so completely stable and never to be updated?
A couple of years ago I saw the Digital Detective from DPS which was a hard disk recorder box for video surveillance taking up to 4 cameras. The best features included being able to tweak what is stored on events including going back in time (perhaps only a little but even 10 secs makes a huge difference) and it could hook up to the net for remote viewing etc. Don't know if they still do them or if they cover all your criteria but no-one else had mentioned them.
Hmm, Corel Updater pointing to Corel and Debian Security is a good big step along the way (you might have to decide whether to break Corel's work and take a debian security update or to risk ploughing on without it). You suggest that all Corel did was make an easier installer, but that's just ignorant! Did you ever install and use Corel Linux? It had samba filemanager integration, a "control panel" which actually did more than tweak your window manager (like control aspects of X or setup printers), Corel Updater which is a KDE apt frontend and the most ridiculously easy installer IF your hardware was supported (each version expanded the installers supported hardware significantly).
Why do you think a Debian based distro has a fight versus Debian? I would forsee/hope that in 5 years only 5% of "Debian" users would actually be using debian.org's version and the rest would be using a repackaged version that does what you need, how you need and is supported the way you want. A company could even sell debian.orgs version but with their own ftp servers for packages and their own support system (i.e. phone and email support for debian). Why should people break their back tweaking and configuring Debian to their task when there are 5% of Debian users (or would be debian users) who need the same! Why should Debian set their base configuration to suit any section of the users instead of providing a sane default setup for everyone to work from? The question is will commercial or non-commercial distros win? My money is on demudi to show the world just how good debian is and for more to follow.
There is no download of the Corel Office suites and never was. There was a download version of Wordperfect 8 (don't know if you can still find it) and a download version of PhotoPaint (was it 9). As for Corel Updater, you can just point your boxes to Debian and grab stuff from there BUT BE WARNED you may blast out some of the Corel customisation, particularly the samba integration. You can just dist-upgrade a Corel Linux box to Debian or you can pick your packages but I wouldn't (I have no knowledge, just guesses) expect Corel Updater to do you too many favours again in the near future (if ever) if you use the Corel sites.
The far more interesting question is can you still order the Linux WordPerfect Office 2000 or Draw 9 from Corel? If not I suspect that MS squeezed the out of it with their non-voting stock deal (do a grep of microsoft on the dll's supplied for a clue as to how Corel shot themselves in the foot and probably blew this).
Slashdot Mirror
Your point? They released some open source software to run on their computers for compatibility and to eat into a market, if they "break" the underlying OS hooks for XP/YP/ZP/2003 then they have no obligation to continue with these tools. This software is in no way comparable to them replacing a major piece of their own written technology with a more free version and especially it does not loosen their control over ?everything digital?
- They are split apart
- They adopt Free Software and Open Standards across the board
- 95%+ of websites will ONLY render with the mozilla engine
- RMS is appointed General/Technical/Absolute Manager
- MS buys AOL
- Hell freezes over
Seriously it will take a massive shift in MS for this to happen and it would probably be one of the least significant things which would appear from such a transition (I imagine a GPL WordViewer would be about top of the list and the biggest thing we could see). MS detests free software (or open software or anything that might prevent their control) and would pay a massive price rather than lose control of the internet browsing experiences of the web. I would actually expect it to be far more likely that MS will become more aggressive in locking out other browsers than IE wherever possible (think IIS, Frontpage and all the MS controlled sites). Hell they conned Tony "The Stooge" Blair into handing over large wadges of cash for the new government public internet portal which is completly IE dependant! Ah well let the battle commense again.Any designer who thinks that a webpage could look the same on all browsers is very new to the game. Make sites that display the content reasonably anywhere that can understand the standards you use and forget about pixel accuracy. Personally I just write clean html code and let it look like it looks in all the different browsers.
Well, by my thinking, bad government gets fucked out until you get a good government which you keep. Pity it never happens (or maybe it did in the US not too long ago, but the system was so screwed they got fucked out and the sort of government that likes to start wars to boost the economy, start trade wars to return to protectionism and fucks the planet to save the economy got in instead!). All you can pray for is that if you EVER get a good government they WILL legislate to make sure the assholes who may follow them can't do stupid things without extreme difficulty, or would you rather government let government be, so the bad government screws you over every time?
$549 sounds like quite a normal price for a high-end mobile phone without subscription and not over the top. I don't believe I could get a GPRS phone here in Ireland for that price let alone less and that's for a phone, not a combo unit like this. Obviously we all want the Treo for $200 but face facts only the crummiest of mass-mass-mass produced phones reach those prices.
Well personally needing to charge every day after heavy usage is ok. Needing to charge during the day us not acceptable.
It's about choice, you can run your bridging firewall with no assigned IP address halted! It's not about how to do it. I thought about just running the kernel on a firewall device I may be designing (which is basically the same is it not). I pictured (possibly) a device that booted up and grabbed a kernel from a trusted network if it's present and reboots with it if it is, if not it is left with nothing but the kernel running (some oddities I had noticed in audio and networking had left me certain a lot could keep running). Call me mad but I envisioned hard coding the iptables into the kernel (I'm still not sure I'd actually run anything on the box, I would like to just run the kernel but that makes the updating more hackish). Whatever you want to do this is another way to secure the system (if it's appropriate for you).
Instead of shutting everything down simply have three boxes. At any given time one box is live on the edge of the network which is configured to simply switch all traffic between the two other boxes (thats a static config, it may take a bit of hacking to come up with a switching solution but it should be easy enough). The two other boxes are the real firewalls so you can update and test the new box and when ready signal the outer box to switch, then next change prep the other box. lather, rinse and repeat as neccessary.
tell that to Linus, there is a web server in kernel 2.4 unless I'm very much mistaken! So who wants to run their webserver at runlevel 0?
if your going to go to this much trouble would you really let it run a kernel which had the capability to mount a hardisk?
Was it? Define devleoped? How many contributions to the source sharing nixs came from outside of the USA? It began in the US without a shadow of a doubt, and it is also without doubt that the most vocal commercial players (and Berkely) were in the USA but I find it incredibly hard to believe that the percentage of work put into developing the nixs outside of the USA is so small to be ignored (in Linux terms how valuable have SUSE been).
Well when I upgraded my rented video recorder and forgot to remove the blockbuster VHS from it I found out how much blockbuster said the video cost them, STG£75 in 1996! The video rental company eventually sent me out a video tape, but it was some other poor random punters home tape with some random TV on it NOT a 4 episode ST::TNG tape. I was receiving debt collectors letters from blockbuster until eventually about 3 months later I managed to get both companies to talk to each other and they did some deal together.
How long will it take if SGI, Sun HP/Compaq and IBM all collaborate?
If Sun said tomorrow that they were going to release freeBSD on all products, IBM, HP and MS would all be far more wary about touching freeBSD for anything. The BSDs suffer from the fact that a closed schism can occur at any time, and in the hands of a company like Sun it would take a very very very long time before people ever imagined that they were not going to close their version. With the GPL Linux is purely collabaritive and hence when IBM put work into the kernel they are just moving the level playing field. How would Sun feel if they adopted freeBSD and put some of their "prize posessions" into its kernel and then Apple simply took those enhancements and integrated them into OS-X but never let Sun see how they integrated it or learn anything in return?
Come on, get a grip! Do you run a MS OS? Have you read the license agreement? And for all your shareware, careware, postcardware (you do send a postcard don't you) and proprietary software (reading those licenses has to be one of the funniest things in the world as long as you don't want to use the software). One reason to move wine from a.n. other license to LGPL would be to have it under a common license, that way you can read one line and know whether you can use the software or not. This is a reason why people will move to Free software.
<ms eula='dmca protected content' drm='8jhdsYBwe8hd'>
<doc gen='OfficeYP' style='KndsJHNs7yu3'>
<1 alt='Heading'>JKMDShsdlkD32u9ou2ohHDJISjkds8765 8GY</1>
<2 alt='Body'>kjdshBHDSiki7sdgw3ioewrq9hIJHSi9e3bn dfweidhjhjdfksIKGHDSIJ2e9quyi</2>
</doc>
</ms>
Call me a dummy but I assumed he meant the possibility of corrupting a distributed global namespace. I presume this features some form of strong authentication system (couldn't reach the site) but it could be pretty hairy if you were doing a make world out of this using any "unofficial" patch sources, but we all audit all the code we run don't we!
The Internet is his key (and yours) but if MS control the current standard Internet connection method AND offer a console AND offer handheld solutions they can use .NET across the platforms to lock out Linux! What DRM technology will be needed on an installed OS to access .NET, will you be able to see the source and will you be able to monitor your system to find out what it is doing (or even your network to see what it is saying)? Will you be able to stop it crashing, will you be able to run it on any hardware with enough power?
The reason it is neccessary to challenge MS on the desktop is the same as the reasons why QNX, Palm and Sony have to challenge in the spheres they can hit. If MS is allowed to lock everyone out of it's .NET (come on, is the name not a giveaway) and 90% of the world's PC's use it, 40% of the worlds handhelds and 15% of the worlds game consoles, how long until those figures are all 90% and we have multiple global "public" networks (and perhaps only one big one).
RedHat/GNU/Linux/FreeSoftware/OpenSource/etc may not defeat MS on the desktop, but if it can hold it in check (e.g. controlling a huge chunk of web servers thereby stopping MS from taking over the "web", and providing Sun with an Office Suite that may get enough PHBs to bite and make MS not bee too naughty) we might just be around to play on the next generation of hardware. If we ignore the desktop we make it that much easier for MS to end up deciding how the digital era progresses. Times are tough, but if we stick to our real guns (we want to participate equally and be allowed to follow our rules) across the board without cenceeding any areas (and especially not the front-end) then we might just make it work, if we concede anything it will be a wedge used technically, legally and emotionally to drive us out. MS don't want a platform, they want to grow, we have to stop them every way we can until they can no longer threaten us.
I've probably got something wrong but I'll try to clarify myself.
Under Ogg's initial licensing nobody other than xiph (with permission from external contributors perhaps) could have made a closed version of Ogg, now anyone can! If a company releases a closed spanky codec based around Ogg for (for example) the ARM, and then this becomes the ARM audio codec of choice Ogg will have suffered a micro-schism. If the closed version is in any way incompatible then Ogg could quickly become irrelevant to most people as their will be one version for their Win/Linux machines and one for their portable players (and maybe even another used for embedded audio in games etc.) and people will not want that. By allowing closed entrants into the game, it may mean itches don't develop in the same way (I can pay $5 and have an audio solution for my ARM or I can start writing one from scratch for a "won" market). What is to prevent an incompatible dominent (in any sphere) version of Ogg appearing which is closed source and therefore the Xiph libs can never (well we'll have to see about reverse engineering it and patent issues) play or encode. Ogg was a Free codec and now it is perhaps less so (imho, as you can tell I believe in the GPL style of copylefting, everyone is entitled to their opinion). I'm not happy about Ogg anymore, not sad about it yet but I fear that maybe I will be.
This is exactly the reason why I wondered if RMS should ever have given his blessing for the Ogg license switch. It would be one thing for someone to develop an Ogg implementation for ARM7 and then say "I'll give it source and all to the first person who coughs up $5m" but another entirely to say "we've done the work and we'll license it to you, why do you need a Free version?" The reason I feel the second options is so much worse is that it can tempt people out of doing work far easier than the Free version could (can you afford $5m? can you afford $2 / instance? How much will development cost and how many instances will be sold?)
Hopefully Ogg will survive this sort of teething (imagine if a modified hacked licensed ARM implementation became the de facto Ogg standard beacuse Sony use it in their OggMan). In the meantime I'm not happy about Ogg as a format anymore.
Should you not move the new plugins/libnull plugin.so into your plugins folder, then rmdir plugins and ln -s? Or is libnullplugin.so completely stable and never to be updated?
A couple of years ago I saw the Digital Detective from DPS which was a hard disk recorder box for video surveillance taking up to 4 cameras. The best features included being able to tweak what is stored on events including going back in time (perhaps only a little but even 10 secs makes a huge difference) and it could hook up to the net for remote viewing etc. Don't know if they still do them or if they cover all your criteria but no-one else had mentioned them.
Hmm, Corel Updater pointing to Corel and Debian Security is a good big step along the way (you might have to decide whether to break Corel's work and take a debian security update or to risk ploughing on without it). You suggest that all Corel did was make an easier installer, but that's just ignorant! Did you ever install and use Corel Linux? It had samba filemanager integration, a "control panel" which actually did more than tweak your window manager (like control aspects of X or setup printers), Corel Updater which is a KDE apt frontend and the most ridiculously easy installer IF your hardware was supported (each version expanded the installers supported hardware significantly).
Why do you think a Debian based distro has a fight versus Debian? I would forsee/hope that in 5 years only 5% of "Debian" users would actually be using debian.org's version and the rest would be using a repackaged version that does what you need, how you need and is supported the way you want. A company could even sell debian.orgs version but with their own ftp servers for packages and their own support system (i.e. phone and email support for debian). Why should people break their back tweaking and configuring Debian to their task when there are 5% of Debian users (or would be debian users) who need the same! Why should Debian set their base configuration to suit any section of the users instead of providing a sane default setup for everyone to work from? The question is will commercial or non-commercial distros win? My money is on demudi to show the world just how good debian is and for more to follow.
There is no download of the Corel Office suites and never was. There was a download version of Wordperfect 8 (don't know if you can still find it) and a download version of PhotoPaint (was it 9). As for Corel Updater, you can just point your boxes to Debian and grab stuff from there BUT BE WARNED you may blast out some of the Corel customisation, particularly the samba integration. You can just dist-upgrade a Corel Linux box to Debian or you can pick your packages but I wouldn't (I have no knowledge, just guesses) expect Corel Updater to do you too many favours again in the near future (if ever) if you use the Corel sites.
The far more interesting question is can you still order the Linux WordPerfect Office 2000 or Draw 9 from Corel? If not I suspect that MS squeezed the out of it with their non-voting stock deal (do a grep of microsoft on the dll's supplied for a clue as to how Corel shot themselves in the foot and probably blew this).