My take on it is that just like before, there will be the whole gauntlet of develop/test/release cycles with Fedora (and its various components), since Fedora will be the source for what eventually shows up in Enterprise. I don't see any reason that there won't be "stable" releases of everything that goes into Fedora. Like now, those who are more inclined to participate in the development process will be installing and working with more recent (and untable) versions, but I'm thinking that won't be the case with the user community at large.
To be honest, I'd rather spend a few extra minutes downloading, than spend hours trying to hunt down every "extra" piece of software that I'd like to install.
If you look at telco equipment makers, like Lucent, one big new feature is ICD (Internet Call Diversion) that cross diverts standard voice calls on to the internet.
Hmmm...a flashy new term for something that's been around for quite a while. I'd wager that it's basically nothing more than a PSTN gateway that handles VOIP. You can buy inexpensive gateways that do the same thing, for around $300 or so. They're very good for SOHO and home use. I'd mention a specific company, but I'm so thoroughly disgusted with them right now, there's no way in hell that I'd do anything that would bring them more business.
My next upgrade would be a better graphics card, because by then, they would have migrated downward in price. I might eventually end up with one of these high-end cards, but if I play my cards right, I'll be paying substantially less than those who bought early.
And what do you think Skype's ultimate objective is? The way I read an interview/announcement was that Skype would eventually come to represent everything its creators said was wrong with the current telecom industry.
At the same time, no one says that it's silly to spend $1000+ on a PC to play games
I might. I was able to put together a very capable system for less than half that (good enough to play PlanetSide without any problems). I guess the price might be somewhere near $1,000 if you absolutely had to have the best graphics card available, but for me (and many others, I suspect) it's an unncessary luxury. 250 fps? Please. Who cares? As long as it does at least 30-40 fps most of the time, the rest is all surplus.
No way. Handing google over to the government provide it with a very powerful tool that could be used to further its agenda in the spying and profiling business. Just send in a copy of your house key, and a written invitation to "drop by any time" while you're at it.
I disagree. I think how well-known you are depends on whose homepage you have configured in your browser settings. In many cases, someone's browser just 'opens to a page with something you can use to search'. I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of net users wouldn't have a clue as to how to change this- they probably even think it's part of the browser itself.
Recently I visited a website (which I believe was mentioned in a post in a related story here on slashdot a few days ago) that had a copy of the software used for vote administration (GEMS), real sample data, and step-by-step instructions on how to access and examine the data, and literally change the vote counts. It's not hard. Anyone with even a slight technical aptitude could do this without too much trouble.
This is only a small part of a huge problem. Serious questions also abound regarding how software updates are handled, how thoroughly they are tested, who oversees the update process, and how soon updates can made before an upcoming election. I think I remember reading that Diebold has managed to install software updates up to the night before an election, without any prior certification. This is not some abstract issue subject to interpretation or rhetorical exercise - it is a very serious problem.
When you talk about "capturing a signficant share of the MS Office market," you're talking about a long-term proposition. Because of the fact that Microsoft is anti-competitive, and will hold its own interests far above the interests of its customers, it's not like you can pop in a new word processor or spreadsheet app and have it be instantly compatible with all of your locked-in Microsoft documents. Unfortunately, this means having to spend time dealing with the discrepancies in translation from one format to another, possible retraining, and other related costs. With these dynamics in place, any penetration of competing software will be a slow process. The best thing that OpenOffice and other potential competitors can do is find ways to make the transition as painless as possible.
But the price seems like it will limit it to a narrow market of "ooh I gotta have that" tech thrill-seekers. For that price, I can build a least two very capable desktop systems.
I'd like to extend my gratitude for your help in proving my point. Also, I thought it might be interesting to point out that I'm not the one posting as an Anonymous Coward.
Ha. Your post is akin to walking into Best Buy, asking for a "98 Degrees" CD, then asking the employee, "So, do you believe the Fahrenheit scale accurately represents human's struggle for knowledge about our place in the universe? Why are we here? What does it all mean?"
Hmmm..Dr Tatiana's Sex Advice to All Creation...Are humans not a part of all creation? Do they not reproduce sexually? Has the human race been excluded from evolutionary biology?
Dare I say that your level of abstraction shares nothing in common with what I did in my initial post. Further, you unfortunately suggest that Slashdot readers have neither the intelligence nor the mental acuity to consider something that is abstract (but certainly not to the level that you claim).
You're not impressing anyone. You're not inspiring "soul-searching" or "meaningful" conversation.
Fair enough. My comments, like anything else, aren't meant to cater to all tastes.
book review about the sexuality and habits of insects & wildlife
The poster drew the inference to getting laid I believe, not me. Aside from that, it's all sexuality and reproduction, so I have not veered off topic - I've merely extrapolated a bit.
This is the most off-topic, meaningless pseudo-psycho-babble spam I've ever read.
And the reason for this is...? We're talking about sexual behavior. I've looked a bit beyond the "what's right in front of me" and included the element of human participation. I apologize if this is a bit more than you can handle.
And unless you're out there feeding the homeless and teaching the deprived
What makes you think I don't practice what I preach?
Overall, I find it damn funny that my post brought such a fiery response. I'm only asking questions, nothing more. Lay off the caffeine. Do some soul-searching. Think. Engage. Then come back and say something meaningful.
and I've bought more (and much more eclectic!) music as a result of that.
That's the problem. You're buying music. And it's even a bigger problem if you're buying music produced by the RIAA. You and millions of other consumers are funding the RIAA madness. So everyone...listen up. If you're going to buy, don't bitch. If anyone is willing to do something about the problem without whining to regulators (which is the only way anything will get done), then get some control over the crack habit that music has become, and STOP BUYING IT.
But when it comes to humans, I don't get it. I could understand if we, as humans, had to constantly struggle for survival (as a species), but this clearly isn't the case. With 6.5 billion and counting, does continued proliferation ever stop making sense?
A friend tells that a common acquaintance is expecting a fourth. I'm supposed to get excited? I guess families can be nice (though often fraught with dysfunction of one sort or another), but what about the big picture? Is there still something to proving one's verility? What have you proven exactly? And does the mere fact that someone can add to the 6.5 billion already in place, really mean anything?
It's all a "been there done that" proposition in my eyes. I'd rather focus on tending to what we already have, than continue to pile more and more onto the heap.
And so with the finalists Linux and Windows you have a neck and neck race. Linux wins in the licensing part, but Windows wins out in the cost of use. The total TCO is pretty much equal, so it's really a toss up at this point.
How do you figure? Linux and Windows both have the fixed cost of support. There is no licensing associated with Linux (like there is with Windows), so in the case of larger installations, this represents a significant cost savings. Where's the "neck-and-neck" here?
The Newham audit allows Microsoft's handpicked shills to report that "TCO" is lower if Newham's desktops continue to use what the vast majority already uses.
I hope this includes the cost of constant (and mandated) upgrades.
Slashdot Mirror
My take on it is that just like before, there will be the whole gauntlet of develop/test/release cycles with Fedora (and its various components), since Fedora will be the source for what eventually shows up in Enterprise. I don't see any reason that there won't be "stable" releases of everything that goes into Fedora. Like now, those who are more inclined to participate in the development process will be installing and working with more recent (and untable) versions, but I'm thinking that won't be the case with the user community at large.
To be honest, I'd rather spend a few extra minutes downloading, than spend hours trying to hunt down every "extra" piece of software that I'd like to install.
Just curious, but how many minutes of long distance does your roommate use each month?
If you look at telco equipment makers, like Lucent, one big new feature is ICD (Internet Call Diversion) that cross diverts standard voice calls on to the internet.
Hmmm...a flashy new term for something that's been around for quite a while. I'd wager that it's basically nothing more than a PSTN gateway that handles VOIP. You can buy inexpensive gateways that do the same thing, for around $300 or so. They're very good for SOHO and home use. I'd mention a specific company, but I'm so thoroughly disgusted with them right now, there's no way in hell that I'd do anything that would bring them more business.
My next upgrade would be a better graphics card, because by then, they would have migrated downward in price. I might eventually end up with one of these high-end cards, but if I play my cards right, I'll be paying substantially less than those who bought early.
And what do you think Skype's ultimate objective is? The way I read an interview/announcement was that Skype would eventually come to represent everything its creators said was wrong with the current telecom industry.
They are like MS. They are in the lead and that's not going to change.
Google isn't like M$ at all. By your own admission, the people at Google are innovative and motivated.
At the same time, no one says that it's silly to spend $1000+ on a PC to play games
I might. I was able to put together a very capable system for less than half that (good enough to play PlanetSide without any problems). I guess the price might be somewhere near $1,000 if you absolutely had to have the best graphics card available, but for me (and many others, I suspect) it's an unncessary luxury. 250 fps? Please. Who cares? As long as it does at least 30-40 fps most of the time, the rest is all surplus.
No way. Handing google over to the government provide it with a very powerful tool that could be used to further its agenda in the spying and profiling business. Just send in a copy of your house key, and a written invitation to "drop by any time" while you're at it.
I disagree. I think how well-known you are depends on whose homepage you have configured in your browser settings. In many cases, someone's browser just 'opens to a page with something you can use to search'. I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of net users wouldn't have a clue as to how to change this- they probably even think it's part of the browser itself.
Recently I visited a website (which I believe was mentioned in a post in a related story here on slashdot a few days ago) that had a copy of the software used for vote administration (GEMS), real sample data, and step-by-step instructions on how to access and examine the data, and literally change the vote counts. It's not hard. Anyone with even a slight technical aptitude could do this without too much trouble.
This is only a small part of a huge problem. Serious questions also abound regarding how software updates are handled, how thoroughly they are tested, who oversees the update process, and how soon updates can made before an upcoming election. I think I remember reading that Diebold has managed to install software updates up to the night before an election, without any prior certification. This is not some abstract issue subject to interpretation or rhetorical exercise - it is a very serious problem.
Actually not a bad idea. Collecting data may be invaluable to them, but inaccurate data is worthless.
When you talk about "capturing a signficant share of the MS Office market," you're talking about a long-term proposition. Because of the fact that Microsoft is anti-competitive, and will hold its own interests far above the interests of its customers, it's not like you can pop in a new word processor or spreadsheet app and have it be instantly compatible with all of your locked-in Microsoft documents. Unfortunately, this means having to spend time dealing with the discrepancies in translation from one format to another, possible retraining, and other related costs. With these dynamics in place, any penetration of competing software will be a slow process. The best thing that OpenOffice and other potential competitors can do is find ways to make the transition as painless as possible.
But the price seems like it will limit it to a narrow market of "ooh I gotta have that" tech thrill-seekers. For that price, I can build a least two very capable desktop systems.
I do not purchase software that requires activation.
I'd like to extend my gratitude for your help in proving my point. Also, I thought it might be interesting to point out that I'm not the one posting as an Anonymous Coward.
Children for the sake of children, eh? A little on the selfish side, wouldn't you say?
Ha. Your post is akin to walking into Best Buy, asking for a "98 Degrees" CD, then asking the employee, "So, do you believe the Fahrenheit scale accurately represents human's struggle for knowledge about our place in the universe? Why are we here? What does it all mean?"
Hmmm..Dr Tatiana's Sex Advice to All Creation...Are humans not a part of all creation? Do they not reproduce sexually? Has the human race been excluded from evolutionary biology?
Dare I say that your level of abstraction shares nothing in common with what I did in my initial post. Further, you unfortunately suggest that Slashdot readers have neither the intelligence nor the mental acuity to consider something that is abstract (but certainly not to the level that you claim).
You're not impressing anyone. You're not inspiring "soul-searching" or "meaningful" conversation.
Fair enough. My comments, like anything else, aren't meant to cater to all tastes.
My oh my...looks like I've hit a sore spot.
book review about the sexuality and habits of insects & wildlife
The poster drew the inference to getting laid I believe, not me. Aside from that, it's all sexuality and reproduction, so I have not veered off topic - I've merely extrapolated a bit.
This is the most off-topic, meaningless pseudo-psycho-babble spam I've ever read.
And the reason for this is...? We're talking about sexual behavior. I've looked a bit beyond the "what's right in front of me" and included the element of human participation. I apologize if this is a bit more than you can handle.
And unless you're out there feeding the homeless and teaching the deprived
What makes you think I don't practice what I preach?
Overall, I find it damn funny that my post brought such a fiery response. I'm only asking questions, nothing more. Lay off the caffeine. Do some soul-searching. Think. Engage. Then come back and say something meaningful.
and I've bought more (and much more eclectic!) music as a result of that.
That's the problem. You're buying music. And it's even a bigger problem if you're buying music produced by the RIAA. You and millions of other consumers are funding the RIAA madness. So everyone...listen up. If you're going to buy, don't bitch. If anyone is willing to do something about the problem without whining to regulators (which is the only way anything will get done), then get some control over the crack habit that music has become, and STOP BUYING IT.
You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.
You forgot the first part:
"We are Billg"
But when it comes to humans, I don't get it. I could understand if we, as humans, had to constantly struggle for survival (as a species), but this clearly isn't the case. With 6.5 billion and counting, does continued proliferation ever stop making sense?
A friend tells that a common acquaintance is expecting a fourth. I'm supposed to get excited? I guess families can be nice (though often fraught with dysfunction of one sort or another), but what about the big picture? Is there still something to proving one's verility? What have you proven exactly? And does the mere fact that someone can add to the 6.5 billion already in place, really mean anything?
It's all a "been there done that" proposition in my eyes. I'd rather focus on tending to what we already have, than continue to pile more and more onto the heap.
You don't need perfect code for security. You need secure code for security, and that's what seems, thus far, to have been beyond Microsoft's grasp.
And so with the finalists Linux and Windows you have a neck and neck race. Linux wins in the licensing part, but Windows wins out in the cost of use. The total TCO is pretty much equal, so it's really a toss up at this point.
How do you figure? Linux and Windows both have the fixed cost of support. There is no licensing associated with Linux (like there is with Windows), so in the case of larger installations, this represents a significant cost savings. Where's the "neck-and-neck" here?
The Newham audit allows Microsoft's handpicked shills to report that "TCO" is lower if Newham's desktops continue to use what the vast majority already uses.
I hope this includes the cost of constant (and mandated) upgrades.