When you purchase Windows you have no free support. You have to pay for it and it's not cheap. You can also buy support for Linux from Redhat and Suse, for example. The advantage for Linux is that there are alot of support groups that are absolutely free. If you have a problem, you post a question on a website. You can do this for Windows as well.
I use both Windows (Vista for the Laptop) and Linux (Ubuntu, Desktop).
I always find it interesting when the Windows camp gets all excited when they think they've found some reason to bash Linux. Usually it's something completely wrong, but they start buzzing like a stirred up bee's nest. I guess they have to feel good about paying so much money for their software. Linux and Windows are created and maintained by a bunch of enthusiastic programmers who are dedicated to what they do. The proprietary model and the open source model have their advantages. Get used to it. The website you are reading now runs on Linux.
Thanks for the reference. I believe, though, that the surveillence which is allowed without a warrant applies only to non-"US Persons" which the document describes on page 4 under section 102 "Authorization for Electronic Surveillance for Foreign Intelligence Purposes". It further restricts this under (B) "There is no substantial likelyhood that the surveillance will aquire the contents of any communications to which a United States person is a party;..."
My understanding and that of congress is that the law was broken by deliberately and knowingly listening in on communications of thousands of Americans and routing or copying virtually all communications to or through their circuits.
I disagree that they were presented with the proper documentation because my understanding is that that documentation is a court order. The executive branch does not have uncontrolled powers except under declaration of war, which only congress can do.
So what I'm getting at is, it's highly likely that the telecoms were presented with authentic enough documentation that they will slide out from under any liability for breaking any laws. That always was the law ever since 1968 when the first wire tap laws were made.
Well, not exactly. The administration was required to get a FISA warrant, which they did not do. They could ask for the information legally, but they couldn't require it without a FISA warrant. And, the telekoms could not legally give it to them without a warrant. That's the law and it was clear to the administration, the justicce department and to the telekoms, all of whom have sufficient legal advice. Problem is, the administration didn't feel they were required to follow the law by the simple declaration that we were at war and they said as much.
One of the first to go will be - no surprise - freedom to dissent.
That reminds me of Bush's use of "Free Speech Zones" at his speeches, which were, I suspect, out of hearing and sight range. The implications is that outside of those zones, no free speech rights exist.
Google may track my usage of their websites, but they don't track my usage of other websites. They also don't track other things I do on my PC. As one poster pointed out, you should read the EULA of any MS product if you want to see what MS tracks.
And, you always have the option with Google to use anothe search engine. You could use Bing, for example, but I suspect they are gathering the same information (or more) that google does.
And if they did have such meetings, and somebody somewhere decided to call it a "screw Microsoft" meeting, then how would that be different to what we're seeing now, except that the actors would be different.
The operative word there is "If". I don't know what Google's meetings are like, but what I do know is what they are doing and what they are pushing for in Washington. Google's efforts seem to be for open standards and web freedom, MS is lobbying to try to force the government to use MS products.
I live near Munich and watched as MS tried to force the city government to use Windows. They tried every trick in the book, and most of them involved strong-arm tactics rather than fighting to compete by providing the better product.
They lost that battle and the entire project cost is only slightly more than what the licenses for Windows and Office would have cost for the time period. Going forward they are saving millions of Euros.
I have no issue with any company competing or even with proprietary solutions and if MS were to compete on that basis, more power to them, but that is not their business model.
I think we need to temper that a little. What could have been done with the Money these governments are spending on MS products becasuse they are locked in?
I think the difference between Google and Microsoft is that Microsoft's Business Model is based on customer lock-in. It's well known and documented. They do this by deliberately creating incompatabilities, MS-only "standards", formats, etc.
Google has become sucessful by creating the best search engine. You always have the choice of using the search engine you like best. But, most people use Google because they feel it is better.
We want to use Google's service but we want to bash them for making money off of it.
I don't think that's what they are saying. Using SSL simply hides your search terms from others (eg. your employer), your ISP, etc. It doesn't affect what google sees are gets paid for.
... most people in management were engineers themselves
Digital (DEC) was ruined by this very mindset change. It used to be run by engineers whose goal was to produce the very best product and the customers knew that DEC made superior products that worked out of the box. Then the bean counters came and started nickle-and-dime'ing customers, charging extra for the OS, Cables, etc, because a 2% increase in revenues is a 2% increase in revenues. They lost alot of loyal customers.
"Good Enough" is euphemistic code for average, mediocre, unimportant.
Well, sometimes, maybe, but not always. We used to call this the 80% rule. You can get 80% of what you consider perfect with 50% of the work/effort/money etc, than you would need to get the perfect solution. And since we don't have limitless resources, we "settle" for that which we can afford. And often that meets our needs.
Case in point: Open Office. I've been using it since Star Office and it has done everything I needed to do. The fact that a commercial product costing $300-$500 does more doesn't interest me.
Of course, it is all done in Firefox under Linux... and THAT part *is* atypical.
I try to do all of my banking transactions using my linux box. It's just safer. I know the Windows appologists are gonna attack me for that, but it just is. My Vista laptop, which I use alot less, has already been infected by a key logger and I don't do much on it. It just showed up one day.
Thanks. I haven't looked at the graphics cards in all those, but from some of the other posts, it appears that the ATI cards have bugs and that, interestingly, only MS and ATI know what they are and they do not document them. It would be interesting to see if those which are slower use those graphic chipsets.
and observe how, unfortunately, XP consistently outperforms Linux:(
I went through the first 10 entries which support both OS's and found 8 were exactly the same and two were longer under Windows XP. Is that what you call "Consistently outperforming"?
If you buy something from IBM or Dell or other serious vendors with Linux already on it the chances are good that they hardware and OS play well together.
Tagged based documents have been around since the early Dec PDP computers in the 70's, if not already in the 60's sometime.
Dec had a program called runoff which used tags to specify format. In a sane world XML would fall into the previous use category, as would any tag based system.
If you are part of a terrorist cell (or a criminal gang) and the police obtain your encryption keys, telling the rest of your cell or gang will enable them to destroy their own compromised data before PC Plod arrives.
If you are a terrorist and you are the kind of person who feels it's ok to take innocent lives, I really doubt a gag order is going to stop you from informing your buddies that the encryption keys are compromised.
the article is right. There are many software/hardware product companies who are shunning Linux and the GPL.
That's the beauty of Open Source. You can choose the License which is best for your needs.
The lack of IP protection (nee, the deliberate elimination of IP protection) is not something companies who innovate are likely to embrace.
That's true, but only if you choose to use GPL'd code. You can't have it both ways -- free lunch and then charge others (or restrict others) for the free lunch you got.
But, if you need an OS which doesn't encumber you, you can use FreeBSD.
It's exactly this type of shit that makes you look like a faggot.
Why is this not getting modded as flamebait?
Most people just ignore the uninformed who are so confused and afraid of the things they don't know or understand that they just start calling people faggots if they don't toe the party line.
We must have compassion. The trailer park where he lived was too far from the school.
The problem, IMO, with E-Voting machines is not so much hackers, but boxes which are manipulated from the start. In essence, you are giving a private company the job of counting votes with no public oversight.
Whether or not government should ensure competition is a subjective question, though many free-market pundits suggest that. It is my opinion, too, but one could just as well argue that absolutely free markets would eventually right themselves, provided there are no barriers to entry for others.
Even my earlier point, that the government did the right thing splitting up ATT, would probably be moot now that Cell phones provide and cable provide competition to land lines. We would have had to wait 35 or so years, though.
Most patents are achieving the modern equivalent of facism, effectively letting government grant sole control in a given area to a limited number of private companies.
Slashdot Mirror
When you purchase Windows you have no free support. You have to pay for it and it's not cheap. You can also buy support for Linux from Redhat and Suse, for example. The advantage for Linux is that there are alot of support groups that are absolutely free. If you have a problem, you post a question on a website. You can do this for Windows as well.
I use both Windows (Vista for the Laptop) and Linux (Ubuntu, Desktop).
I always find it interesting when the Windows camp gets all excited when they think they've found some reason to bash Linux. Usually it's something completely wrong, but they start buzzing like a stirred up bee's nest. I guess they have to feel good about paying so much money for their software. Linux and Windows are created and maintained by a bunch of enthusiastic programmers who are dedicated to what they do. The proprietary model and the open source model have their advantages. Get used to it. The website you are reading now runs on Linux.
Thanks for the reference. I believe, though, that the surveillence which is allowed without a warrant applies only to non-"US Persons" which the document describes on page 4 under section 102 "Authorization for Electronic Surveillance for Foreign Intelligence Purposes". It further restricts this under (B) "There is no substantial likelyhood that the surveillance will aquire the contents of any communications to which a United States person is a party; ..."
My understanding and that of congress is that the law was broken by deliberately and knowingly listening in on communications of thousands of Americans and routing or copying virtually all communications to or through their circuits.
I disagree that they were presented with the proper documentation because my understanding is that that documentation is a court order. The executive branch does not have uncontrolled powers except under declaration of war, which only congress can do.
So what I'm getting at is, it's highly likely that the telecoms were presented with authentic enough documentation that they will slide out from under any liability for breaking any laws. That always was the law ever since 1968 when the first wire tap laws were made.
Well, not exactly. The administration was required to get a FISA warrant, which they did not do. They could ask for the information legally, but they couldn't require it without a FISA warrant. And, the telekoms could not legally give it to them without a warrant. That's the law and it was clear to the administration, the justicce department and to the telekoms, all of whom have sufficient legal advice. Problem is, the administration didn't feel they were required to follow the law by the simple declaration that we were at war and they said as much.
One of the first to go will be - no surprise - freedom to dissent.
That reminds me of Bush's use of "Free Speech Zones" at his speeches, which were, I suspect, out of hearing and sight range. The implications is that outside of those zones, no free speech rights exist.
Google may track my usage of their websites, but they don't track my usage of other websites. They also don't track other things I do on my PC. As one poster pointed out, you should read the EULA of any MS product if you want to see what MS tracks.
And, you always have the option with Google to use anothe search engine. You could use Bing, for example, but I suspect they are gathering the same information (or more) that google does.
Sure, they brought personal computing to the masses.
Apple II? Commodore 64? Amiga?
Remember that MS got big by supplying DOS to IBM.
And if they did have such meetings, and somebody somewhere decided to call it a "screw Microsoft" meeting, then how would that be different to what we're seeing now, except that the actors would be different.
The operative word there is "If". I don't know what Google's meetings are like, but what I do know is what they are doing and what they are pushing for in Washington. Google's efforts seem to be for open standards and web freedom, MS is lobbying to try to force the government to use MS products.
I live near Munich and watched as MS tried to force the city government to use Windows. They tried every trick in the book, and most of them involved strong-arm tactics rather than fighting to compete by providing the better product.
They lost that battle and the entire project cost is only slightly more than what the licenses for Windows and Office would have cost for the time period. Going forward they are saving millions of Euros.
I have no issue with any company competing or even with proprietary solutions and if MS were to compete on that basis, more power to them, but that is not their business model.
but they are saving lives, and educating children
I think we need to temper that a little. What could have been done with the Money these governments are spending on MS products becasuse they are locked in?
that only runs a Google browser
You can run firefox, opera and ephinany under Chrome OS.
I think the difference between Google and Microsoft is that Microsoft's Business Model is based on customer lock-in. It's well known and documented. They do this by deliberately creating incompatabilities, MS-only "standards", formats, etc.
Google has become sucessful by creating the best search engine. You always have the choice of using the search engine you like best. But, most people use Google because they feel it is better.
We want to use Google's service but we want to bash them for making money off of it.
I don't think that's what they are saying. Using SSL simply hides your search terms from others (eg. your employer), your ISP, etc. It doesn't affect what google sees are gets paid for.
... most people in management were engineers themselves
Digital (DEC) was ruined by this very mindset change. It used to be run by engineers whose goal was to produce the very best product and the customers knew that DEC made superior products that worked out of the box. Then the bean counters came and started nickle-and-dime'ing customers, charging extra for the OS, Cables, etc, because a 2% increase in revenues is a 2% increase in revenues. They lost alot of loyal customers.
"Good Enough" is euphemistic code for average, mediocre, unimportant.
Well, sometimes, maybe, but not always. We used to call this the 80% rule. You can get 80% of what you consider perfect with 50% of the work/effort/money etc, than you would need to get the perfect solution. And since we don't have limitless resources, we "settle" for that which we can afford. And often that meets our needs.
Case in point: Open Office. I've been using it since Star Office and it has done everything I needed to do. The fact that a commercial product costing $300-$500 does more doesn't interest me.
Of course, it is all done in Firefox under Linux... and THAT part *is* atypical.
I try to do all of my banking transactions using my linux box. It's just safer. I know the Windows appologists are gonna attack me for that, but it just is. My Vista laptop, which I use alot less, has already been infected by a key logger and I don't do much on it. It just showed up one day.
Thanks. I haven't looked at the graphics cards in all those, but from some of the other posts, it appears that the ATI cards have bugs and that, interestingly, only MS and ATI know what they are and they do not document them. It would be interesting to see if those which are slower use those graphic chipsets.
and observe how, unfortunately, XP consistently outperforms Linux :(
I went through the first 10 entries which support both OS's and found 8 were exactly the same and two were longer under Windows XP. Is that what you call "Consistently outperforming"?
If you buy something from IBM or Dell or other serious vendors with Linux already on it the chances are good that they hardware and OS play well together.
So it's diesel - is it as gutless as I've been led to believe diesel cars are? I've never driven one, but I am genuinely curious....
Diesel engines have alot more torque than gas engines do so they actually feel quicker especially when accelerating in the low end.
Tagged based documents have been around since the early Dec PDP computers in the 70's, if not already in the 60's sometime.
Dec had a program called runoff which used tags to specify format. In a sane world XML would fall into the previous use category, as would any tag based system.
If you are part of a terrorist cell (or a criminal gang) and the police obtain your encryption keys, telling the rest of your cell or gang will enable them to destroy their own compromised data before PC Plod arrives.
If you are a terrorist and you are the kind of person who feels it's ok to take innocent lives, I really doubt a gag order is going to stop you from informing your buddies that the encryption keys are compromised.
the article is right. There are many software/hardware product companies who are shunning Linux and the GPL.
That's the beauty of Open Source. You can choose the License which is best for your needs.
The lack of IP protection (nee, the deliberate elimination of IP protection) is not something companies who innovate are likely to embrace.
That's true, but only if you choose to use GPL'd code. You can't have it both ways -- free lunch and then charge others (or restrict others) for the free lunch you got.
But, if you need an OS which doesn't encumber you, you can use FreeBSD.
It's exactly this type of shit that makes you look like a faggot.
Why is this not getting modded as flamebait?
Most people just ignore the uninformed who are so confused and afraid of the things they don't know or understand that they just start calling people faggots if they don't toe the party line.
We must have compassion. The trailer park where he lived was too far from the school.
Excellent. Finally someone is talking about the real problems with E-Voting. Thanks.
The problem, IMO, with E-Voting machines is not so much hackers, but boxes which are manipulated from the start. In essence, you are giving a private company the job of counting votes with no public oversight.
Whether or not government should ensure competition is a subjective question, though many free-market pundits suggest that. It is my opinion, too, but one could just as well argue that absolutely free markets would eventually right themselves, provided there are no barriers to entry for others.
Even my earlier point, that the government did the right thing splitting up ATT, would probably be moot now that Cell phones provide and cable provide competition to land lines. We would have had to wait 35 or so years, though.
Most patents are achieving the modern equivalent of facism, effectively letting government grant sole control in a given area to a limited number of private companies.